“The subscription for shares shows the confidence held by senior management in the new initiatives ASG Group is undertaking"
This imo is more Geoff Lewis gobbledygook.
The Deferred Vendor payments were always to be made in a combination of cash and script. Progress Pacific was 50/50 cash/script and while we weren't given the cash/script breakdown for Capiotech I believe it was also 50/50 cash/script.
Lets look at Capiotech as the largest and most verifiable aquisition disappointment. The orginal deal was for 30m which represented 5 x expected EBIT over 2011&12, however due to poor Earnings the total acquisition price was scaled back to 15m. Annual EBIT contribution has been 3m as opposed to the expectation of 6m.
So of this 15m paymnents were made as follows;
June 2010 4.734m shares were issued at $1.32 per share ($6.250m cash equivalent) Sept 2010 $3.196m cash paid Sept 2012 $7.625m cash paid (with an unknown amount reinvested back in shares)
The total shares recently issued had a value of 4.062m which represented both Capiotech and Progress Pacific.
Its misleading to represent the share issue as Senior managers wanting to reinvest in the business, it is actually fulfilling the Purcahse conditions of the initial aquisitions.
I have never shorted a stock but ASZ would be an ideal candidate even now it is considerably lower than my exit price.
ASZ Price at posting:
58.5¢ Sentiment: Sell Disclosure: Not Held
