Agree, our previous board approved purchase of TEVA at multiples of expected/ projected earnings. Nothing wrong with this, as this is the industry norm in valuations.
Our current board should have been consistent and expected a scheme offer at multiples of ACTUAL current EARNINGS at minimum which I cannot see has been achieved with the offer price.
Waiting to see how this offer has been in our best interest to accept with earnings and profitability to grow. The purchasers payback will be possibly 1 X EBITDA, certainly less than 2 X EBITDA which is an absolute bargain in any industry metric. What listed company on the crusp of profitable operations sells for 1 X, let alone 2 X earnings???? I would like a specific example in pharma provided by the IE if a statement is made it is fair.
We have spent our $$$$, not the boards $$$$ on projected earnings in the past and yet have not achieved with this specific offer a multiple of current actual earnings,. This is my biggest question on the proposed transaction that's needs clarification and justification.
I would like more of an explanation and commentary to shareholders in relation to this rather than a fluffy statement.
Imagine how you would feel as a vendor if you knew your neighbours in Bondi were getting millions for their properties but your agent has told you to consider accepting an offer at a fraction of that price because it would be beneficial to bring a new face into the neighbourhood and make the new purchaser very happy. In fact the purchaser may eventually flip the property for some extra $$$$ because they know that with a little patience they can make some real $$$#$.
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)