leighton117
18 Nov 2016
Prospects ? Does anyone think there is reason to believe we might see a strong upward movement in the WTG s.p. (say 20%+) in the next two/three months ?(I'm thinking of finally getting out - the price and perhaps the company seems to be bogged down !)
weblogic
16 Nov 2016
Not a titter .. yet. Nothing as yet re the progress on claims from Mr Assie down under.
eagle51
01 Oct 2016
Re: Why the late jump? Not much volume - probably just MMs keeping their book in balance?The independent review of SGH's 'claims' can't take place before the end of the warrant period (end of Nov). I doubt either side will say anything more in the meantime.SGH must be saying someone lied to them. Big shout. Who? Rose will have to give that big bonus back if it was him! Wasn't it about the same as the escrow?I very much doubt anyone did - they wouldn't have been in a position to be able to, having only recently arrived on the scene. Now, if a certain RT had been there, I'd be buying shares in SGH............
strapuk
30 Sep 2016
Why the late jump? Anyone any thoughts on the reason for the late +11.75p jump?Haven't seen an RNS.Sniff that SGH decided not to proceed maybe?? Oh well, better than an 11.75p drop I suppose.
Roger Baron
30 Sep 2016
Re: Capital distribution -CGT disposal Thanks Eagle.(Don't kick the dog too hard on my account.)
eagle51
29 Sep 2016
Re: Capital distribution -CGT disposal Henry took this personally and has spent time with his master's wife looking at this situation. It was suggested to her that as she will have to perform the same exercise when someone else's tax return is completed quite soon, she might as well look at it now. It took her all of about 10 minutes to do this so there's no chance of her getting paid in kind for it - besides, the Ryder Cup is on and it's well over 3 years to the next leap year (and it might not even be a qualifying one at that - can't remember now). I've written it off and she won't remember, despite being younger than me.Anyway, it has to do with A/(A+B) x base cost, where A is the cash returned (however many shares you owned x 90p) and B is the market value of the shares immediately after the return of capital. The shares (ex the 90p) opened at 115p on the suspension being lifted but don't forget that at the same time there had been a 1 for 10 consolidation, so it was the new shares (however many you had on 21 Dec 2015) multiplied by 115p that was the relevant market value (ie B). The result of the above should give you the appropriate base cost to offset against the proceeds you received. I am told that, in practice, if the proceeds an individual receives fall within that individual's annual CGT exemption, the whole proceeds can be declared as a gain and the base cost left untouched to carry forward for offset against future proceeds.
oilovlam
29 Sep 2016
Re: Capital distribution -CGT disposal Didn't the clean as a whistle 'snow white' Harry 'Sandbanks' Redknapp once blame his dog for having a Swiss bank account stuffed full of brown envelopes....a very clever dog that.....I wish I had one, my dog fills his 'doggie bags' with something other than fifty pound notes.I think Harry is a sure thing to replace Sam. Neither has done anything wrong....or at least they haven't been found guilty.
eagle51
29 Sep 2016
Re: Capital distribution -CGT disposal Roger B - I have just returned after being out most of the day, only to find that whilst I was out, my 11 year old cocker spaniel (he's called Henry) hacked into my laptop and has written a number of posts in my name, making all kinds of ridiculous statements about how capital returns of the kind made by QPP at the end of last year are dealt with in making GGT returns. He failed completely to understand the meaning of 'part disposal' despite having it explained to him on a few occasions by his tax advisor, who happens to be my wife (and who understands these things, whereas neither Henry nor I really do despite thinking we might - I should because I spent my working life busily engaged as a partner in one of those accounting firms that sometimes investigates basket cases like QPP).I have been roundly laughed at for not changing my password often enough and now I have to apologise to you for Henry's actions. Just as well neither he nor I have ever had to do our own tax returns - we might be in prison.Anyway, I am reliably informed the answers you seek are contained within the walls of the linked article below. Henry joins me in sending our apologies. I've had a glance at the article and it looks bloody complicated to me so I intend to continue not to complete future tax returns. I have to pay her in kind but it's probably worth it - it's only every other leap year nowadays............[link]
auntysatia
29 Sep 2016
Re: SGH/PSD As far as I can see, this is a straight forward gamble by SGH.Their chance of success may be just 1 in 50, but it is then a worthwhile gamble to spend, say, £750k on legal costs to pursue it (66-1 payout on a 50-1 chance).It may even be worth WTG surrendering a couple of million just to make the claim go away.(Others may know better, but I seem to recall that each side would bear their own costs in the case of a warranty claim).
eagle51
29 Sep 2016
Re: Capital distribution -CGT disposal You aren't deemed to have parted with a % of your holding. All that happens is that the disposal proceeds are deducted from the base cost of your investment leaving a reduced base cost to offset against future capital proceeds of the investment. If the proceeds you received reduce the base cost to nil or a minus figure, then capital proceeds taking the base cost into minus territory will fall to be taxed as profits.The article I linked shows you how to do it even if the circumstances are different.On your tax return the capital return is recorded as a part disposal reducing your base cost accordingly. "Nil" is the lowest your base cost can be reduced to (meaning that all future proceeds would be capital gains).That's how I understand it works anyway.
Roger Baron
29 Sep 2016
Re: Capital distribution -CGT disposal Eagle, my question is, if the payment received is a part disposal (which we agree it is) then how much (%) of my holding am I deemed to have disposed of and how much do I now have remaining?
eagle51
29 Sep 2016
Re: SGH/PSD Crikey, oilovlam - I didn't realise your post was that daft - safarinorman ticked it up
eagle51
29 Sep 2016
Re: SGH/PSD "Plus a major part of the write down of $1m SGH made"...............$1bn
eagle51
29 Sep 2016
Re: SGH/PSD "For all investors I was sorry to hear that S&G are taking things to court"................SGH will only be able to: "take things to court" if an independent barrister, acting as arbitrator and whose findings both sides have agreed to abide by, decides that, prima facie, specific claims made against the warranty escrow are valid.Given the fact that the PwC investigation work was incomplete at the time SGH did what it described as its own due diligence, stated that it was well aware of the issues within QPP and announced when it signed the deal that it had relied on its own investigations (which showed that the new business would be accretive to SGH's overall earnings with the consideration representing 7.1 times earnings calculated by SGH people) and made all kinds of statements about the future I for one felt were ridiculous - they were after all dependent on raising the money from banks and the market - it smacks of desperation that they should now try to recover some of what they (probably foolishly) paid for PSD.Warranties in transactions of this nature aren't set up to recompense people for stupidity. They are established to ensure that the assets within businesses sold exist and are legally owned, that there are no unprovided for losses and that no-one deliberately misled anyone as to what was being acquired.It's a try on and I'll be surprised if it does anything except damage Grech's reputation (does he have one except as an arrogant clown?) further, together with SGH's, which is now in tatters. The transition was appallingly managed by people who don't appear to have had a clue. Plus a major part of the write down of $1m SGH made was as a result of Osbornes proposals to alter the small claims division limits supposedly to cut down on whiplash claims, but in reality to benefit his friends in the insurance industry who should be doing it themselves. Plus SGH adopted the new accounting standard on income recognition when it was not obliged to do so, which knocked a lot off WIP and profit.Other than as above I expect they have a great chance.
eagle51
29 Sep 2016
Re: Capital distribution -CGT disposal Roger - my understanding is that any capital proceeds arising from the ownership of capital assets are treated as part disposals. It's certainly how mine have always been treated and will be here - my tax returns are done by a tax partner in a firm of CAs.Maybe she's been wrong all these years.I don't see what the % of the business disposed on has to do with anything and I'm not aware the subject has ever been addressed. Why would it be?
