>hi Hoisty>the independent expert's report made interesting...

>hi Hoisty
>the independent expert's report made interesting reading. >The valuation of 69-80c makes the gpg offer of 55 seem >totally inadequate. if they are serious about the >takeover then they will have to lift their price.
>According to the independent expert report the excess >land that gqh holds needs to be re-zoned before any >development can go ahead and there is no guarantee this >will happen and if it does will take at least a couple of >years so this wouldn't be a quick money maker for the >company . Also it seems as if there won't be an upturn in >business for another year or so.
>gpg obviously thinks it can do a better job of running >and improving the company than the current management but >at this stage is not prepared to pay a reasonable price >to get control. It will be interesting to see if any >other buyers come along and/or whether gpg ups the offer >price

I agree with you there shan, the 70c - 80 c value per share in the report in NTA, not allowing for goodwill, taker premium or upside of land development. I reckon taking all that into account the real value if there was a bidding war would be around $1 per share. You must remember that GPG are a bunch of "Scum Suckers" I have been shafted by them before. Had some shares in Greens Foods and they talked the directors into a scheme of arrangement and I "just" broke even. They tried to pull a few stunts when I had shares in tower insurance, they wanted to be the only ones to have shares issues cheap and finally the directors put the offer to all the shareholders.

I think GPG are are a bit of a "fishing" trip and leaving the options. They put the bid forward just to stir things up and see what happened. These are the following points I will make.

a. If they wanted more shares had to put a bid in as they were close to 20% or could use creep provision to gradually aquire more share.

b. Knew that bid would get rejected and GQH would do independant report from that they could work out whether or not put in increase bid.

c. Puts the company in play, if someone comes along with better offer they would have to speak to GPG and GPG could sell out at a premium.

>It is interesting that another substantial shareholder
>(Alan Davis Holdings)has requested a general meeting to >have a director(Norman J Nolan) removed immediately.Alan >Davis was the managing director of gqh until he retired >in Nov 07 and Nolan is md until they appoint someone else
>Anyone know the reason for this or anything about Nolan? >I can't find any info on Nolan

Looks as though there could have been bad blood between former and current directors perhaps GPG are seizing upon this. Best way to find out what really is going on with the company is attend the meeting which will be coming up.
You will be surprised how few people attend and what information you gain which you could not do otherwise.

Cheers Hoisty