This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

NMS - Neptune Marine Services

Jump to new
Thanks for that Baglimit.

Hope you're doing well and enjoyed the last couple of weeks without thinking about the options too much.

Your summary sounds right - just not sure what happens if it's done the other way around, (i.e. Buy the shares and then sell).

Anyway - looks like I've got a couple of months to do my research and consult an accountant before anything happens with these shares.
 
by the comments people have made, looks like not too many people of going to take up there share of the CR. Its almost like throwing good money after bad.
 
the capital raising is intended to pay back all banks and vendor debt. Why save the banks, by taking money from existing shareholders to give to them. What happens if the business continues to perform badly? The CR is taking risk away from the banks and giving it all to the shareholders.

If banks deem the business is too risky and are asking for all there money back, it too is too risky for the average shareholder.
 

The two things I hate about any company raising equity to paydown debt are:

1) It is normally a indicator of poor cashflow.

2) The return on the extra capital would be equal to the bank's interest rate - you should require a larger return on investments.
 
whats the net asset of the company? I only ask this, because if the cr doesnt go through the banks will come in to protect there interests and want to sell everything. Wonder how much they are charging interest for the 55m debt. Have heard its legal for them to charge upto 20% in certain situations, plus penalty fees.
 

You'll have to wait to read the prospectus with the entitlement issue to get an up to date feel for the numbers. Shareholder approval for the issue is expected to be sought around 12 February.

But any net asset backing number will be very subjective. Assets, particularly very specialised equipment such as NMS owns, may not realise anywhere near book value in a forced sale.

Disc: Not currently holding NMS.
 
How low can they go? 2008-2009 was a very bad year for service and construction industry like NMS. 2010 wasn't much better with election and mining tax. Management matters a lot. AE&E (construction) shut down because poor management on few project around. After the capital raising, how low could it go really. Any movement in the share will give a large % gain or lose.
 
been a terrible two yrs of performance. Im sure people noticed this. Why did people hang on so long? I got out of this one when someone said on the hotcopper forum, that the two ships where doin nothing, and are in port. Thats what has killed this company, idle ships and personnel. And they are still idle in port, one in singapore, and one in darwin
 
Who has the stomach to put more money into this thing? Everybody i talk too just cant do it. Where are they going to get the funds from? C lange wasnt a bad manager, his vision was excellent, just he bought the businesses at the wrong time, when the market was extremely hot and overpaid. Its the easy money the banks and institutions gave to C lange that caused the problem. If the GFC didnt happen, everybody would be still singing his praises. Expansion is good, but its better to consoludate one market Australia first and then expand overseas. The overseas expansion was sucide.
 
- capital raising (CR) : did you wonder WHY the scrip is NOT UNDERWRITTEN ? Answer: because there was no financial institution that would agree to do that. And further 'why' : because they would be throwing GOOD money away
- the way this CR is done is absurd : if this alone does not ring ALARM bells in you then what would ?
- this CR proves that company management consists of either fools or very smart people who make a lot of money with each capital raising
- it a panic attempt not to go bankrupt. But they will not raise even near $60m min they require.
- NMS directors can NOT be trusted: they proved that in the past and they proved it again on 25 Jan 2011 with new delays and the rest: - they have just written down $99.5 mln !!!
- that means that all new subscribers will generally participate in a kind of an IPO, not in true CR. But this IPO is easier to asses than ordinary IPO - we all know that management is bad, and this information alone is worth a lot
- there is a statement in GM NOTICE that the shortfall may be placed at directors discretion : but no details are given ! So for example : can they distribute that at say 0.1 cents each ?
- since year 2004 the number of NMS shares on issue grew almost 12 folds : from 37m to 435m. And now they will dilute by another 3.6 times !!! This stock will become a proverbial toilet paper : there will be almost 1.6 bln (billion !) shares on issue ! People : notice that number ! They raised money so many times - it seems to never end
- why management does not clearly state at least in today's announcement NMS's financial position, at least: non liquid / liquid assets vs current debt ? How much are ships and equipment worth ?
- a very good point was : "If banks deem the business is too risky and are asking for all there money back, it too is too risky for the average shareholder"
- I lost a few $k on NMS (considering shares are now worth $ 0) and I do NOT intend to loose one cent more. I agree with one of the posts : "why save the banks, by taking money from existing shareholders to give to them". I'd rather invest that money elsewhere with new and very careful analysis
- I read many other NMS posts and ~ 1/4 of people were ready to participate in this CR. So they will raise may be ~ $20m, far cry from 60m they want

DISCLOSURE: I own NMS shares (unfortunatelly !)
 
delayed the meeting to march now. The longer it takes the quicker the company will go bust. Personally i hope the banks get nothing out of nms. They caused this my issueing so much cheap, no strings attached debt. CL was the vehicle the banks used. Wonder what provisons the banks will have in there 1/2 yr report next month. If NMS is in there, well people know not to take up any rights, and cut and run
 
Very easy to blame the banks for lending "too much". Equally, they get accused of not lending to "worthy companies"!

The buck actually stops with company management. They get well paid to manage the risks.

 
oldblue said:
Very easy to blame the banks for lending "too much". Equally, they get accused of not lending to "worthy companies"!

The buck actually stops with company management. They get well paid to manage the risks.

Click to expand...

The banks want nothing to do with the NMS and are calling on all there loans, is that managments fault too? Didnt manage that risk. The banks are good enough to lend to nms, just as shareholders where good enough to buy new shares. The only ones that lose are investors, and the only people to blame are managment, its never a greedy banks fault?

why dont the banks back nms when its in trouble and not call on ALL the loans. Love to know the interest rate they are charging.. Whats changed now compared to yrs ago?
 
oldblue said:
It seems that a lot has changed.

We're still waiting to learn the details.

Disc: .
Click to expand...

i too dont own stock, your not one of these people that really own stock, but are afriad to say they have nms stock? Strange you want to post "No longer holding NMS"

when people heard the two ships where idle you would have been a moron to hold the stock.
 
adds4 said:
when people heard the two ships where idle you would have been a moron to hold the stock.
Click to expand...

Please try and avoid using these kind of deliberately insulting terms to describe those still holding NMS. It is provocative and not particularly conducive to a cordial discussion.
 
Many people own stock in all sorts of companies without knowing anything about the actual business. They hold based on it being in an index or a margin lending list, historic share price performance or simply due to a decision to buy stock in all companies meeting certain criteria operating within a particular industry.

In short, there would be plenty of shareholders who had no idea that NMS even had any ships, let alone that they were idle.
 
Joe Blow said:
Please try and avoid using these kind of deliberately insulting terms to describe those still holding NMS. It is provocative and not particularly conducive to a cordial discussion.
Click to expand...

sorry i should have said stupid. The point i am making is the writing was on the wall with two ships being in port
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...