Aus & NZ Off Topic For all non S2000 related topics

Investments- special thread

Thread Tools
 
Old Jun 7, 2007 | 11:05 PM
  #11  
Beaver's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,983
Likes: 0
From: Sydney
Default

But could certainly spell "visiting hours", "non-parole period" and "self representation".
Reply
Old Jun 8, 2007 | 03:33 AM
  #12  
cashout's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,472
Likes: 0
From: Sydney
Default

I just read that the deal came through according to SMH.

BTW. Cemex is Mexican (Mexican Cements). And they walk a fine line when it comes to making bids for big jobs. They were fined a few million bucks some years back in Colombia for providing plain old crappy road base for a road resurfacing project (100+ kms worth of)
Reply
Old Jun 8, 2007 | 04:25 AM
  #13  
RedRover's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,164
Likes: 0
From: Melbourne
Default

Originally Posted by Beaver,Jun 8 2007, 04:04 PM
If I understand correctly, the takeover price is USD15.85 .................................................. ...... If you got 0.87 when converting back, you would effectively get a price of AUD18.21 and lose about 50 cents a share and also lose holding costs.


Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of the offer document, nor do I have the time to do a big search for a copy - so I haven't been able to see the fine print where they specify exactly how the final amount will be calculated and/or if there is a clause that "guarantees" A$19.50.

All the documents I could find in a quick search say USD$15.85. I assume this is the reason why the market price is less than the "guaranteed" $19.50.

If anyone has a copy of the official doco - could you please scan it & copy here. Thanks.

On another note - I still remember Margaret Jackson promising that the Qantas takeover was a certainty.
Reply
Old Jun 8, 2007 | 06:34 AM
  #14  
fisting dwarves's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,148
Likes: 0
From: Brisbane
Default

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/...s/sxrinker.php
Reply
Old Jun 14, 2007 | 03:26 AM
  #15  
RedRover's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,164
Likes: 0
From: Melbourne
Default

Reply
Old Jun 14, 2007 | 03:39 AM
  #16  
fisting dwarves's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,148
Likes: 0
From: Brisbane
Default

A bunch of my mates got on board this ship. Free money for everybody. Huzzah!
Reply
Old Jun 14, 2007 | 04:16 AM
  #17  
Austblue's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,085
Likes: 0
From: 3rd bedroom on the right
Default

Can I just check that I'm reading/interpreting this correctly?

Outlay =$37,000
Profit = $1,400
Term = 6 weeks

Just seems like a small, slow return on such an outlay to me but then what do I know
Reply
Old Jun 14, 2007 | 04:56 AM
  #18  
cashout's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,472
Likes: 0
From: Sydney
Default

Originally Posted by Austblue,Jun 14 2007, 10:16 PM
Can I just check that I'm reading/interpreting this correctly?

Outlay =$37,000
Profit = $1,400
Term = 6 weeks

Just seems like a small, slow return on such an outlay to me but then what do I know
Oh.. unless my maths are wrong that is ~37% p.a. return.
It is free money!!!!

O.K. not really because it is not guaranteed after the 6 weeks.

Still gives you 3.8% return in six weeks. Same amount in a term deposit would give you 6% p.a. or 0.00069% in hte 6 weeks. Which is roughly $256.

Bottom line:

Term Deposit = $256 in six weeks at 6%
This investment = $1400 in six weeks at 37%.


Reply
Old Jun 14, 2007 | 02:12 PM
  #19  
Austblue's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,085
Likes: 0
From: 3rd bedroom on the right
Default

3.8% return in six weeks
because it is not guaranteed after the 6 weeks.
Personally I see these two facts as the bottom line. Not only that but I would've thought that the potential opportunity cost would be such that the $1,400 profit wasn't worthwhile.

You risk $37,000 by going in or $1,400 by not.
Reply
Old Jun 14, 2007 | 03:02 PM
  #20  
Alister's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,180
Likes: 0
From: Melbourne
Default

Originally Posted by Austblue,Jun 15 2007, 08:12 AM
You risk $37,000 by going in or $1,400 by not.
You're hardly 'risking' the $37k Aust - it's not like the company is going to implode overnight and be worth nothing.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:56 PM.