Skip to content
Advertisements

88 Energy – Who were the Institutional Investors?

Disclaimer: Shareinvestors is not authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority to give investment advice. Terms such as ‘Buy’, ‘Sell’ and ‘Hold’ are not recommendations to buy, sell or hold securities, these statements and other statements made by the author have the meaning only to express the author’s personal views on the quality of a security. Independent financial advice from an authorised investment professional should always be sought before making investments. CAPITAL AT RISK. Full Disclaimer here.


On 22nd April 2016, 88 Energy raised A$25m (£14m) through a placing of some 715 million shares. This was an increase to total the number of shares in issue by 22%. 88 Energy took delight in informing us of the ‘high calibre of the proposed investors’. I have highlighted the parts from the RNS on that day:

88e Placement Extract 1

88 Energy went even further by specifically mentioning institutional investors:

88e Placement Extract 2

Let me ask a question, what does the phrase ‘institutional investor’ mean to the typical private investor? Are you picturing BlackRock, State Street or some other ‘high calibre’ long term investor? Did you think ‘Great! If these guys backed this placement then that should give your typical private investor some confidence right?’

So why then in the four months since the placement have we seen no ‘TR-1’ forms filed as RNSs? The share capital has increased by 22%, you would therefore naturally assume that if any institutions had taken part and retained their holdings then at least one would have surpassed a 3% holding, whereby a TR-1 should be filed. A quick check of the shareholder register (Source: 88 Energy Website) confirms my suspicions:

Capital Structure

Top 20 Shareholders as at 13th May 2016

Rank Name Balance % of Total Units%
1 HARGREAVES LANSDOWN (NOMINEES) LIMITED 276,948,113 7.11
2 BARCLAYSHARE NOMINEES LIMITED 238,282,131 6.12
3 HSDL NOMINEES LIMITED 201,774,421 5.18
4 HARGREAVES LANSDOWN (NOMINEES) LIMITED 185,512,950 4.77
5 HARGREAVES LANSDOWN (NOMINEES) LIMITED 172,012,530 4.42
6 TD DIRECT INVESTING NOMINEES (EUROPE) LIMITED 170,569,345 4.38
7 HSDL NOMINEES LIMITED 115,265,654 2.96
8 HSBC CLIENT HOLDINGS NOMINEE (UK) LIMITED 91,418,190 2.35
9 INVESTOR NOMINEES LIMITED 88,304,241 2.27
10 TD DIRECT INVESTING NOMINEES (EUROPE) LIMITED 82,519,208 2.12
11 SHARE NOMINEES LTD 77,535,063 1.99
12 INVESTOR NOMINEES LIMITED 73,687,281 1.89
13 NATIONAL NOMINEES LIMITED 51,697,564 1.33
14 J P MORGAN NOMINEES AUSTRALIA LIMITED 51,575,912 1.33
15 CHASE NOMINEES LIMITED 46,703,299 1.2
16 JIM NOMINEES LIMITED 44,827,954 1.15
17 CITICORP NOMINEES PTY LIMITED 43,022,753 1.11
18 ELOTEN GROUP LTD 40,000,000 1.03
19 CHASE NOMINEES LIMITED 36,546,860 0.94
20 LAWSHARE NOMINEES LIMITED 34,264,399 0.88

The major shareholders are all nominee accounts, i.e. private shareholders using a third party broker.

So using the terms ‘high calibre’ and ‘institutions’ looks to me like nothing more than PR guff. The ‘institutions’ that took part in this placing, which was at a 14% discount to the share priced on 22nd April, i.e. 1.90p placing vs 2.20p market price we must assume to have flipped their subscriptions straight into the open market. I can’t see any evidence of intuitions in the top 20 shareholders, note ELOTEN GROUP took place in a prior placing and appears to be a BVI registered vehicle

The questions I have therefore are: 1) Were PIs suckered in to buying based on ‘institutional investors’ to support the share price whilst these ‘institutions’ flipped the stock? 2) Did 88 Energy have awareness that those taking place in the equity raise were flippers? 3) If so why did it use the misleading language above? 4) Why were existing shareholders not able to participate in this discounted issue through open offer?

I actually like 88 Energy as a company and I believe it is probably one of the best speculative resource stocks on AIM at present. CEO Dave Wall comes across well and there is an exciting news flow due over the next 12 months.

I’m not going to give an overall verdict on this stock but it would be nice to see a much fairer and clearer approach to 88 Energy’s next fund raise.

Categories

88E

Advertisements

One thought on “88 Energy – Who were the Institutional Investors? Leave a comment

  1. Jacka Resources Limited 51,004,431 £1,249,609
    Mr Donald Jeffrey Smith 22,500,000 £551,250
    Peninsula Investments (Wa) Pty Ltd 14,000,000 £343,000
    Westblade Pty Ltd 5,000,000 £122,500
    Ablett Pty Ltd 4,050,000 £99,225
    Australian Global Capital Pty Ltd 4,000,000 £98,000
    Shebdon Investments Pty Ltd 2,628,996 £64,410

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: