RE:RE:Bye Bye Murray Sinclair/Earlston's intention to sell was announced in the substantial issuer bid circular. Earlston's primary business is unconventional real estate lending so I would guess they may be facing cash flow challenges.
Can't really dispute the value of Dundee's cash and marketable security investments. They have liquidation value that is well in excess of current market cap.
How come POLAR, Sinclair/Earlston are selling. Above Catscratch shares a view on how come Ealrston might be selling.
What troubles me with DC.a is a very unclear picture on how a shareholder gets paid their share of the valuation gap between stock market price and underlying assets values. We clearly saw DC.a un-willing to up the share buy-back in January notwithstanding something like 6 million shares tendered at $1.40 but not bought.
The liquidity in the public market is modest at best. Selling in that market quickly depresses the stock price as we have seen since last month post SIB. Selling large stakes privately also means taking a hair cut as Ma Goodman experienced a few months back.
I have to wonder about POLAR selling. My thought is POLAR not see a path to converting underlying asset value to cash in the pockets of shareholders hence move on to new investment opportunities. Secondly, DC.a is ramping up as a junior play, this is a massively different type of investment in terms of risk than the risk profile of DC.a in place we POLAR bought originally. My take is POLAR not warm to new risk profile hence reduce exposure by selling.
In summary, DC.a not have a clear plan for cashing up shareholders' share of gap between market and underlying. DC.a becoming much higher risk due to large bets in junior mining. These are reasons why investors might move on. Its a frustrating stock to hold at times.