j.c. flowers runs its eye over suncorp, page-4

IPod,
As a recent convert to HC I am very pleased to find your post, particularly because of the issue raised in paras 4 & 5 relating to the $23 per share offer by Westpac. There is no doubt in my mind that the offer was made by Westpac. An article appeared in the 11 May 2009 Financial Review at page 56 disclosing the offer. The article also disclosed that after three weeks consideration the Board rejected the proposal.Suncorp has not made an announcement denying the offer which as far as I'm concerned means it must have been made. They've had over three months to deny it!

At the time Westpac's shares were trading at around $22. Had the offer been put to the shareholders and accepted (I've also got no doubt it would have been accepted or flushed out a better offer)we would now be holding at least one Westpac share worth around $23 for each Suncorp share now held worth around $7.60.

Suncorp has been a chronic under-performer and many shareholders would have retained their shares in the hope that one of the major banks would make such an offer. In fact I had been surprised since Suncorp was floated that no offer had been made. As you can imagine, I was gobsmacked to discover that an offer had been made but the Board did not disclose it. The Fin Review article also states that the decision to keep the bid private leaves the Board open to criticism.

I'm thinking about something a bit stronger than criticism because for the life of me I can't see how the decision was in the shareholder's best interests. Simple arithmetic shows us that we are at least $15.40 per share worse off as a result of the decision not to proceed with the offer. Keen to hear any shareholders views on this. I'm thinking IMF and I am extremely unhappy!