Hi guys,
I was looking back at the relationship with AXA, and it seems to have been sub-par historically. AXA signalled in Dec 2022 that it was unhappy with the service, wanted the ability to speak to other providers "for business continuity planning" and wanted £750k refunded for poor service levels.
They have now exited the JV, removing exclusivity, giving them freedom to appoint another provider.
What makes you think AXA have any intention of exercising the Convertibles at double the market price at the time they were inked? Or of continuing the relationship with the same volume and at the same fees? Do you think they are just keeping DOC sweet while they transition to another service? I see the reviews are mixed/terrible on the app stores.
If there is no exclusivity, and AXA comprise 94% of revenue, don't they have huge bargaining power? What if the new Master Agreement states lower fees, because DOC now have the ability to pursue other clients? Won't Total Revenue tumble in Q2/Q3?
I'm finding it really hard to swallow DOC's explanation here. AXA had *all* the bargaining power. Why would AXA let DOC bully them: "Hey AXA (much bigger company, who we owe loads of money to)... we request that you turn your loan into Convertibles, exercisable at double the current price, which means only a 20% holding (not a control position), AND remove our exclusivity obligation so we can get new clients, but keep paying us the same rate. Thanks!"
If AXA were really interested in the Equity, and they knew they had DOC over a barrel, wouldn't they have responded: "No, but we *will* convert them at the current price (/discount) if you like, for a control position" ?
Doesn't it seem more likely that DOC was on the receiving end of AXA wanting to remove the exclusivity obligation/dissolve the JV? I wonder if DOC have spun this to make it sound beneficial to them?
Any thoughts on this line of thinking? Why do you assume AXA are now really happy and want to own 20% of the company by exercising their Convertibles at double the price? Aren't they a business, not a charity? It seems awfully generous, considering they probably could've got a much better deal.
Any input gratefully received.
Expand
