- Joined
- 1 January 2005
- Posts
- 78
- Reactions
- 0
June 29, 2007
Michael Kiernan Is Not Going To Let Go Of Consolidated Minerals Easily
By Our Man In Oz
“I’ll teach you boys how to fight like a dirty sailor.” Words which, to this
day, ring in the ears of anyone who suffered through school under a
Hungarian physical education teacher known to everyone as Akos. Michael
Kiernan was one of those boys. The next few weeks will tell whether he was a
good student of the Hungarian, who was forced first to fight for the Germans
in World War Two, and then for the Russians, before taking to Australia his
peculiar view of the world. Kiernan’s background, reinforced by time as a
“truckie”, is what will probably provide him with an advantage when the
gloves come off in the battle for Consolidated Minerals because opposing him
are gentlemen of a `more refined upbringing.
Brian Gilbertson, a patrician mining executive who lists Jermyn Street,
London, as his office address, and Carter, a one-time senior executive
of BHP, are the men opposing Kiernan. They see what’s happening as a simple
test of character. Kiernan, who is keen to reclaim control of a business he
once ran, sees it as a brawl. More importantly, Kiernan really doesn’t care
who gets hit when the chairs and tables start flying across the room. Akos
would be so proud!
Earlier today a glimpse of what’s to come in the battle for Consolidated, a
troubled Australian manganese and chromite miner, was provided when the
target company refused to talk to Kiernan about a possible alternative
merger proposal to one lodged four months ago by Gilbertson’s company,
Pallinghurst Resources. The official reason was that the Consolidated board
has “significant concerns around a number of aspects of the proposal.” The
problem with such a fast rebuttal, coming within 24 hours of Kiernan’s
proposal, is that shareholders in the target company must be asking what’s
wrong with setting up a bidding duel for the business?
In a nutshell, this is the Consolidated situation. Gilbertson is proposing a
complex scheme of arrangement that will result in Pallinghurst emerging with
60 per cent of a new business (New Consolidated), with the terms being
A$1.68 per Old Consolidated share plus two shares in the new business. He
has the full backing of Consolidated’s chairman, Carter. Kiernan is offering
A$1.50 cash, plus 1.5 shares in a small iron ore miner called Territory
Resources. Trying to compare the offers is virtually impossible, but Carter
was scathing in his dismissal of the Kiernan proposal saying in a statement
that “the board believes it is in the best interests of Consolidated
Minerals shareholders to continue to pursue existing strategies … and move
forward with Pallinghurst”.
That statement, and especially the refusal to allow Kiernan to look at
Consolidated’s books, has set the cat among the pigeons. There is
speculation in Consolidated’s home town of Perth that a second Consolidated
director will follow today’s departure of Allan Quadrio and resign over the
situation. And there is speculation that Kiernan will ratchet up the
pressure on the rest of the board by sweetening the offer with an all-scrip
swap of three Territory shares for one Consolidated, eliminating any capital
gains tax problems for Consolidated shareholders. Capping off the way
Kiernan will play were two of his pithy observations, firstly that the
existing Consolidated board “hasn’t got any skin in the game” – slang for
not being major Consolidated shareholders, and secondly that two
institutions with “skin in the game” are on his side.
The two institutions named by Kiernan are actually far more than
shareholders, they are major customers. Hong Kong-based Noble group, and the
European metal trader, DecoMetal, speak for about 12 per cent of
Consolidated. Given that Gilbertson, and his principal supporter, Carter,
need 75 per cent of the votes at a meeting called for July 19 to discuss the
Pallinghurst offer and it raises the possibility of a successful shareholder
revolt, with Kiernan cheering from the sidelines.
To complicate an already somewhat surreal situation of complex and non-
comparable bids, we have an ex-chief executive exchanging unpleasantries
with an incumbent chairman while the world manganese market rises strongly.
Kiernan, as another indication of the game he will play, has a very pointed
question to ask on that score. “Why did it take so long for the Consolidated
board to report on the rising manganese price.” The answer could be that
manganese is not openly traded and the Consolidated board was waiting for
the detail. The problem with that is that when the board did report on the
sharp rise in the manganese market (June 25) that was 11 days after the
chief executive of BHP Billiton, Chip Goodyear, told Minesite’s Man in Oz to
“take a look at the manganese market” because it had doubled in price. Chip
knew. Consolidated’s shareholders only found out later. “The day
Consolidated reported on the manganese market was the day Gilbertson put his
offer price up A30 cents,” Kiernan told Minesite.
“The board of Consolidated is on very, very, thin ice,” Kiernan said. Nobel
and DecoMetal between them have got 12 per cent. Those two companies buy 80
per cent of Consolidated’s manganese and 100 per cent of the chromite. This
board with a limited number of shares is saying to two major shareholders,
who are actually their major customers, that even if they support Kiernan’s
bid we - the board- think it’s no good, and we’re not going to let you look
at the books.”
“We have been denied what was made available to Pallinghurst. You have to
ask a few questions about whether we’re dealing with a level playing field.
The board owns a limited number of shares. I am told that some 20 to 25 per
cent of the shareholders will vote against the Pallinghurst offer. All I’m
asking to see is if there are any skeletons in the company closet. If there
aren’t any, we’ll put a formal bid in by July 16. Gilbertson had four months
of due diligence. I’m only asking for two weeks.”
As a final though about Kiernan there is a morning in his life that he will
never forget. It was swimming lessons at dawn with Akos. The river in which
the training took place was packed with jellyfish. Not benign little white
ones. Massive, brown, Portuguese man-o-wars. Did Akos care? No. He pushed
everyone in. Two lessons were learned. First, how to avoid the biggest
jellyfish. Second, how Australian kids learn to swim very fast. That has to
be a coded message as to who Aussie investors will be backing – the local
kid made good or the multinational company patricians - and the answer is
obvious.
The Pallinghurst led consortium can probably raise the cash part of their offer to $2,00, as this does work out to what their new partner in the consortium could add. Taking it that they would add 50% to the original cash offer.
How strong is the bid by Territory? The market appears to see it as a weak option and the Territory share halt continuing does point to a fear of a big plunge in the stock price. Would their shareholders back it?
http://www.territoryiron.com.au
The market cap. of TTY is about $240 million at $1.48.
I think they know how much CSM worth at the very beginning, but they are just too greedy. they want to benefit as much as they can at the minimum cost. could you pls tell me why they would probably increase their cash part bid to $2 ?
Territory Resources Limited (ASX:TTY), an independent Australian resources group, advises it has written to the Board of Consolidated Minerals Limited (ASX:CSM) informing them, if access to due diligence is provided, Territory is prepared to consider a $2 per share cash consideration and 1 Territory share per CSM share in an alternative proposal or an all-scrip alternative of 3 Territory shares per CSM share.
Announcement out this morning:
So, with TTY at $1.20-$1.30, this values CSM at $3.20-$3.30 for the cash/scrip alternative, or $3.60-$3.90 for the all-scrip alternative.
But TTY still need access to CSM's books; and Mr. Baxter is not going to let that happen.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?