RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:ELFYeah, I didn't totally understand the rules either. For example,do all of 1.2 (1) (a) (i) A-D need to be fulfilled or is only one good enough (B-D are likely checked but I haven't done the math, while A couldn't have been checked for the last one either). Obviously 1.2 (1) (a) (ii) is satisfied.
I still don't understand why you would be upset if they are able to execute another SIB. I also don't see why they would want to spend money on a formal valuation report if they don't have to. Maybe you are right and they don't want to do one but if it's the only way to buy back stock they might. We haven't seen the holding companies D&A and C&FS buy stock while the NCIB is active unless ELF had already completed it's weekly block limit.
SIBs are voluntary, no one is forced to tender their shares and there is no BOD recommendation to tender shares.
I'll continue to look for shareholders to close the discount and you will keep effectively telling them to stay away from these apparently nefarious Jackmans even though you own a ton of stock yourself.
Given the discount, I guess your narrative is winning, which makes the SIBs more accretive. It's a real paradox.
chuck84 wrote: as always, and i give you complete credit for it, you do deeper analysis than anyone in this name. in this case going so far as to dig up that link. i didn't bother as the knowledge a dealer provided liquidity opinion was sufficient for me.
that said from what i can gather about the rules you provided make it seem even harder to get SIBs thru for ELF.
the purpose of the SIB is to get a large block WITHOUT having to get a valuation opinion as is required for mergers/takeovers etc. clearly ELF wants to avoid that as it would likely come in above $2000 (no avoiding reciprocal shares as the minute you plug in IFRS NAV, it forces conversion to the GAAP method)
a SIB requires a liquid market. section 1.2 tells us that ELF fail that test miserably on almost every count. so then the always present loophole's kick in and in this case that is an "opinion" by a well greased banker with no established parameters to speak of.
i by no means rule out them being successful getting another opinion but ELF's true float is shrinking very rapidly and there comes a point where no opinion would pass the OSC regardless of the pedigree of the dealer being bribed to write one.
i understand your logic that these tests shouldn't even exist, but they do and for good reason.
hypothetically you suggest that post another SIB, liquidity can be guaranteed by way of an NCIB. well how exactly is that policed? NCIB's don't force the company to do anything. ELF bought 100 shares since the NCIB was renewed 2 months ago - is that providing liquidity? are they obligated to bid daily in open market at a set discount based on an establised formula for NAV or a minimum price? what's to stop NAV exploding as it did from 2014-2020 while stock went nowhere and discount exploded to unimaginable levels?
i take comfort that there are rules and regulations in society. A lot of effort goes into establishing them and in THEORY they are there to protect us. That they get circumvented time and again is generally not with the public good in mind.