BBGI Corporate takeover - possible loss of entire value of shareholding?

NickAnt1961

It seems very dodgy the way this was carried out. It would be similar a  bank sending out reminders to all it's customers saying it was closing down and would be no longer open for business after a certain date, and by a date before this you should agree to receiving your savings plus a bonus back. If you missed their communications or failed to act you might receive nothing or have to accept what ever they decided to give you in a few months time. 

 It  Seems Like Nonsense.

masonic

NickAnt1961 said:

It seems very dodgy the way this was carried out. It would be similar a  bank sending out reminders to all it's customers saying it was closing down and would be no longer open for business after a certain date, and by a date before this you should agree to receiving your savings plus a bonus back. If you missed their communications or failed to act you might receive nothing or have to accept what ever they decided to give you in a few months time. 

 It  Seems Like Nonsense.

It's not like that at all. It's similar to a bank failing and you ignoring invitations to claim compensation from the FSCS. Take the example of the Icesave failure, where customers could elect to have their money paid out within a few weeks by the UK scheme, or if they did nothing, see out their fixed term and then attempt to make a claim at maturity. Some did this for good reason (high interest rate for longer), but the risk was they'd have to claim the first part of their money from the Icelandic scheme, which might not pay out.

As a shareholder, you have a responsibility to your company to engage with the process. You have a responsibility to make your own investment decisions. If you are unwilling or unable to do this, then you should not invest in individual shares. This is not a consumer playground where nanny will look after you if you can't be bothered. Serious amounts of money can be taken from the unwary, and there is no protection against losses due to such investment risks. This situation is one where people are unlikely to materially lose out, as they will receive a distribution equivalent to what the assets can actually be sold for, in due course. But it could have been a lot worse.

It's the same with legal proceedings against you. If you don't proactively deal with them, you could face a default judgement against you. Or have a case against you decided without your input in a single justice procedure.

NickAnt1961

HL claim to be a consumer friendly company, for DIY investors and savers, I think in this instance they should have done more to protect their clients.

I was completely unaware this sort of thing could be considered legal, surely all shareholders should have received the same payout if the company was bought out.

I don't know who you work for masonic, but you are obviously no friend of the small DIY investor. I suspect you are a paid moderator for one of the companies involved in this.

masonic

NickAnt1961 said:

HL claim to be a consumer friendly company, for DIY investors and savers, I think in this instance they should have done more to protect their clients.

I was completely unaware this sort of thing could be considered legal, surely all shareholders should have received the same payout if the company was bought out.

I don't know who you work for masonic, but you are obviously no friend of the small DIY investor. I suspect you are a paid moderator for one of the companies involved in this.

This has nothing to do with HL. It is between the investor and their company. HL has no right to interfere. Suggest you do some basic research on how corporate actions work. It is often the case that those who do nothing have a different outcome to those who take up what is offered. Otherwise there would be no need to ask shareholders to make a choice. In other scenarios, those who vote decide for everyone - and they likely will not be voting according to what is best for anyone else.

Some people tend to launch into personal attacks against those who tell it as it is, when that doesn't support the viewpoint of the individual concerned. It is sometimes a thankless task, but an important one. Not a task that is paid. It should be, but it isn't.

Yours truly,

A DIY Investor

NickAnt1961

Certainly will be keeping an eye on all corporate actions from now on.

Still feeling robbed. why can't BCI still continue the offer for the shares after the delisting, if they are not trying to rob people?

As previously stated it wasn't  until the delisting that I realised what was going on.

I am not the only one to be caught by this about 2% of the shares by value, but I'm sure a much larger %  of actual share holders, the majority of who will be people like myself with a small holding.

masonic

The background, details and reasoning can be found in the various RNS announcements linked earlier in the thread. I'm sure you are right that there will be a fair number of shareholders who, like you, did not act, and I for one hope they had a very small holding so that the lesson wasn't too costly for them.

NickAnt1961

Thats kind of you that you hope nobody has lost too much. 

I have really previously not taken much notice of many of the messages from HL. As a small share holder voting etc really makes no difference, so you just have to go with the flow. So have learnt that there a dangers in doing this.

My investments are for the long term, so am not too bothered about the loss of liquidity for a few months, but would hope for return on my investment on my delisted shares to be similar to the past performance of BBGI as, I guess nothing has really changed accept there is now a 98% majority shareholder, who hopefully won't see fit to bully everyone else.

They are after all a pension provider, who have seen BBGI as a good investment .

wmb194

HL is an execution only stockbroker, it isn't allowed to recommend any course of action.

This always happens; it already has for some types of securities but this is why the FCA would love to ban retail investors from owning shares and bonds in individual companies. They don't pay attention and even when they do many cannot understand the documents. 

At least there are forums like this where people can try to help shareholders decide what course of action to take but it came too late for this one.

masonic

NickAnt1961 said:

Thats kind of you that you hope nobody has lost too much. 

I have really previously not taken much notice of many of the messages from HL. As a small share holder voting etc really makes no difference, so you just have to go with the flow. So have learnt that there a dangers in doing this.

My investments are for the long term, so am not to bothered about the loss of liquidity for a few months, but would hope for return on my investment on my delisted shares to be similar to the past performance of BBGI as, I guess nothing has really changed accept there is now a 98% majority shareholder, who hopefully won't see fit to bully everyone else.

They are after all a pension provider, who have seen BBGI as a good investment .

It is good that you have learned something from this experience.

I wouldn't hold pension providers up on a pedestal when it comes to making savvy investments. The major shareholders of Thames Water are pension providers.

As for return on investment, there was mention of it coming as a special dividend, so potentially taxable. But as a non-shareholder I am not fully across all of the information.

poseidon1

This has been quite an insightful thread,  especially in the context of the Government's intention to try and encourage far more of the public to invest.

Interesting to note four contributors to this thread were caught napping by the BBGI takeover, and seem not to understand that execution only brokers are precisely that when it comes to corporate actions.  One wonders how many other retail investors in this company now find themselves in a similar predicament,  and perhaps should instead have been investing in collective investments rather than individual shareholdings.

As a holder of Direct Line, I had been regularly keeping abreast of the takeover activity related to it in the press, and made sure the final corporate action details were in accord with the agreed terms previously announced. 

Seems to me holding individual shareholdings is definitely not a 'buy and forget' excercise, you are in effect appointing yourself as your own active investment manager  and should be acting accordingly.