Forum Archive Index - October 2000

["Ian Andrews" <iandrews@ihug.co.nz>]

Good point about possible political overtones in the proposed FFS sale.  

 

But on the valuation question, is it unreasonable to accept the evidence of the figure in the audited 30 June accounts of $1.70; in the absence of other evidence?  Those who are being wise after the event - perhaps you could share your (detailed) valuations with us?

 

Until the weak holders bail out, FFS's price may not head up. Daily turnover is still too high to convince me that a bottom has been reached, but those selling are almost certainly sacrificing value which is being transferred elsewhere.  

 

Dr Deane could be grilled to the point of resembling charcoal at the 2 November AGM, especially if there is further bad news. I well recall the 1993 AGM of Corporate Investments, when faced with 900 investors smarting from a 70% fall in the share price over the previous year & some spirited questioning, Chairman Peter Masfen admitted "I hadn't been looking forward to this meeting". CIL hadn't even been looking for extra cash from its shareholders. However, by 1996, things had well & truly turned around & AGM's since then have become mutual congratulation events.  

 

Of course, it is always possible some good news for FFS will appear before 2 November.