Disclosure EXPO

@ccsentha wrote:How nicely they have transferred two of the companies from expo holdings to their  own Aberdeen holdings.

Expo is a listed company and it has public investors as well, but  Aberdeen holdings is privately owned by the directors of expo.

So basically public fund/money has been transferred to their own account. (Unless the valuation of 550M for both companies are genuine which is highly unlikely).

It is worth while to note that Aberdeen holdings is not a subsidiary of the expo holdings, it is a separate entity owned by the same people.

@The Alchemist wrote:

@ccsentha wrote:How nicely they have transferred two of the companies from expo holdings to their  own Aberdeen holdings.

Expo is a listed company and it has public investors as well, but  Aberdeen holdings is privately owned by the directors of expo.

So basically public fund/money has been transferred to their own account. (Unless the valuation of 550M for both companies are genuine which is highly unlikely).

It is worth while to note that Aberdeen holdings is not a subsidiary of the expo holdings, it is a separate entity owned by the same people.

I know for a fact that this process was very transparent (but i cannot tell you how i know). 
In fact, they called for bids for company's transferred and transferred them at a HIGHER value than the best bid received. In other words, it was not worth that much to quoted Company Expo, had debts and did not form part of their forward looking strategy for the listed group.     
In fact, that food company (which included Paan Paan the bread shop), they transferred had a negative net worth !. 
They have been more than fair. Good god fearing people, these Expo Lanka chaps. 
Read the disclosure properly. they went through a transparent process supervised by a reputed Chartered Accountancy Firm & their Independent Non Executive Directors.

@kas - EXPO gets the Cash Inflow. It sold some non core businesses of EXPO at more than their instrinsic value to a privately held family company which has common directors /  shareholders same as EXPO.

@The Alchemist wrote:

@ccsentha wrote:How nicely they have transferred two of the companies from expo holdings to their  own Aberdeen holdings.

Expo is a listed company and it has public investors as well, but  Aberdeen holdings is privately owned by the directors of expo.

So basically public fund/money has been transferred to their own account. (Unless the valuation of 550M for both companies are genuine which is highly unlikely).

It is worth while to note that Aberdeen holdings is not a subsidiary of the expo holdings, it is a separate entity owned by the same people.

I know for a fact that this process was very transparent (but i cannot tell you how i know). 
In fact, they called for bids for company's transferred and transferred them at a HIGHER value than the best bid received. In other words, it was not worth that much to quoted Company Expo, had debts and did not form part of their forward looking strategy for the listed group.     
In fact, that food company (which included Paan Paan the bread shop), they transferred had a negative net worth !. 
They have been more than fair. Good god fearing people, these Expo Lanka chaps. 
Read the disclosure properly. they went through a transparent process supervised by a reputed Chartered Accountancy Firm & their Independent Non Executive Directors.

@kas - EXPO gets the Cash Inflow. It sold some non core businesses of EXPO at more than their instrinsic value to a privately held family company which has common directors /  shareholders same as EXPO.

@ccsentha wrote:

@The Alchemist wrote:

@ccsentha wrote:How nicely they have transferred two of the companies from expo holdings to their  own Aberdeen holdings.

Expo is a listed company and it has public investors as well, but  Aberdeen holdings is privately owned by the directors of expo.

So basically public fund/money has been transferred to their own account. (Unless the valuation of 550M for both companies are genuine which is highly unlikely).

It is worth while to note that Aberdeen holdings is not a subsidiary of the expo holdings, it is a separate entity owned by the same people.

I know for a fact that this process was very transparent (but i cannot tell you how i know). 
In fact, they called for bids for company's transferred and transferred them at a HIGHER value than the best bid received. In other words, it was not worth that much to quoted Company Expo, had debts and did not form part of their forward looking strategy for the listed group.     
In fact, that food company (which included Paan Paan the bread shop), they transferred had a negative net worth !. 
They have been more than fair. Good god fearing people, these Expo Lanka chaps. 
Read the disclosure properly. they went through a transparent process supervised by a reputed Chartered Accountancy Firm & their Independent Non Executive Directors.

@kas - EXPO gets the Cash Inflow. It sold some non core businesses of EXPO at more than their instrinsic value to a privately held family company which has common directors /  shareholders same as EXPO.

It says transparent all right, but every companies says so, was is really transparent? that is the question. Is the valuation a genuine one? Look it says supervised by a reputed Chartered Accountancy Firm & their Independent Non Executive Directors why didn't they mention the name of the company?
bcoz it too could it be one of their related firms.


Why didn't they just sell it to some one else?

why should they sold it to one of their own privately held firm?


why wasn't the matter passed on the share holders before?

@The Alchemist wrote:

@ccsentha wrote:

@The Alchemist wrote:

@ccsentha wrote:How nicely they have transferred two of the companies from expo holdings to their  own Aberdeen holdings.

Expo is a listed company and it has public investors as well, but  Aberdeen holdings is privately owned by the directors of expo.

So basically public fund/money has been transferred to their own account. (Unless the valuation of 550M for both companies are genuine which is highly unlikely).

It is worth while to note that Aberdeen holdings is not a subsidiary of the expo holdings, it is a separate entity owned by the same people.

I know for a fact that this process was very transparent (but i cannot tell you how i know). 
In fact, they called for bids for company's transferred and transferred them at a HIGHER value than the best bid received. In other words, it was not worth that much to quoted Company Expo, had debts and did not form part of their forward looking strategy for the listed group.     
In fact, that food company (which included Paan Paan the bread shop), they transferred had a negative net worth !. 
They have been more than fair. Good god fearing people, these Expo Lanka chaps. 
Read the disclosure properly. they went through a transparent process supervised by a reputed Chartered Accountancy Firm & their Independent Non Executive Directors.

@kas - EXPO gets the Cash Inflow. It sold some non core businesses of EXPO at more than their instrinsic value to a privately held family company which has common directors /  shareholders same as EXPO.

It says transparent all right, but every companies says so, was is really transparent? that is the question. Is the valuation a genuine one? Look it says supervised by a reputed Chartered Accountancy Firm & their Independent Non Executive Directors why didn't they mention the name of the company?
bcoz it too could it be one of their related firms.


Why didn't they just sell it to some one else?

why should they sold it to one of their own privately held firm?


why wasn't the matter passed on the share holders before?

q1 bcoz it too could it be one of their related firms.

no it was not a related firm. btw, do you know of any reputed chartered accountancy firms related to Expo-Lanka ?

q2 Why didn't they just sell it to some one else?

because they must have wanted to keep it in the family as some family members were running them ? 

q3  why should they sold it to one of their own privately held firm? 

same answer as in q2 applies. 

q4 why wasn't the matter passed on the share holders before?

bcos i guess it not need shareholder approval as it may have not constituted a major transaction.

@ccsentha wrote:

@The Alchemist wrote:

@ccsentha wrote:

@The Alchemist wrote:

@ccsentha wrote:How nicely they have transferred two of the companies from expo holdings to their  own Aberdeen holdings.

Expo is a listed company and it has public investors as well, but  Aberdeen holdings is privately owned by the directors of expo.

So basically public fund/money has been transferred to their own account. (Unless the valuation of 550M for both companies are genuine which is highly unlikely).

It is worth while to note that Aberdeen holdings is not a subsidiary of the expo holdings, it is a separate entity owned by the same people.

I know for a fact that this process was very transparent (but i cannot tell you how i know). 
In fact, they called for bids for company's transferred and transferred them at a HIGHER value than the best bid received. In other words, it was not worth that much to quoted Company Expo, had debts and did not form part of their forward looking strategy for the listed group.     
In fact, that food company (which included Paan Paan the bread shop), they transferred had a negative net worth !. 
They have been more than fair. Good god fearing people, these Expo Lanka chaps. 
Read the disclosure properly. they went through a transparent process supervised by a reputed Chartered Accountancy Firm & their Independent Non Executive Directors.

@kas - EXPO gets the Cash Inflow. It sold some non core businesses of EXPO at more than their instrinsic value to a privately held family company which has common directors /  shareholders same as EXPO.

It says transparent all right, but every companies says so, was is really transparent? that is the question. Is the valuation a genuine one? Look it says supervised by a reputed Chartered Accountancy Firm & their Independent Non Executive Directors why didn't they mention the name of the company?
bcoz it too could it be one of their related firms.


Why didn't they just sell it to some one else?

why should they sold it to one of their own privately held firm?


why wasn't the matter passed on the share holders before?

q1 bcoz it too could it be one of their related firms.

no it was not a related firm. btw, do you know of any reputed chartered accountancy firms related to Expo-Lanka ?

q2 Why didn't they just sell it to some one else?

because they must have wanted to keep it in the family as some family members were running them ? 

q3  why should they sold it to one of their own privately held firm? 

same answer as in q2 applies. 

q4 why wasn't the matter passed on the share holders before?

bcos i guess it not need shareholder approval as it may have not constituted a major transaction.

Fine mate, u seems to be a faithful fan of EPO. I as only putting up my doubts!!!!!!

@Jake Sully wrote:Off the subject but there are chartered accountants and firms who will sign any shit for a fee.

@K.Haputantri wrote:Still I have some reasonable doubts about their action even after reading the  lengthy discussion above (Thanks all who contributed) for two reasons-

(1) If the tender procedure is really transparant (as Alchemist insists) no one has any controle over the selling price and to whome it is to be sold (refer to answers of Al to questions 2 & 3). Then how could EXPO decided to sell it to a family company as Alchemist says.

(2) I remember that, there was a serious error (intentional?) in their prospectus at the IPO (corrected later- too late because by that time many had applied) favouring pre-IPO share owners of some private placement of shares at bargain prices. This eroded their integrity over managing public funds.

?Can any one enlighten me on this.

@K.Haputantri wrote:Thanks Alchemist for your lenthy explanations on behalf of EXPO.

My question now is, ?are they repeating the same blunders in their private companies too by buying loss making companies they could not run in a listed company profitably paying the highest price.

Or ?were they spending public funds recklessly but are very smart in handling their priate companies.

?Can we call them God fearing people, at least they should have been shareholder fearing people in a public company. This is very strange.

As for the pre-IPO blunder, it was discussed in the following link.
http://forum.srilankaequity.com/t4546-softlogic-the-angel-expo-the-devil-story-of-private-placements?highlight=EXPO+IPO

Almost all retail investors lost substantially because pre-IPO share holders dumped their shares below IPO price making a huge profit. SEC regulation on lock up of private placement shares were in effective because they had other shares which were not locked up and could be sold.

Such IPOs are partly responsible for the current down trend of the CSE.

@K.Haputantri wrote:The following link also usefull.

http://forum.srilankaequity.com/t3352-expo-error-in-prospectus-admitted?highlight=EXPO+IPO

They profited through a loop-hole in SEC regulations but submitting a prospectus without price sensitive info is a crime. If I were the SEC Chairman, I suspend the IPO for three months untill proper prospectus is issued. They should not be allowed to play with public funds like this.

I heard a recent amendment to this trying to plug the hole.