This submission was received from a reader of the BU blog. It is apparent to all that BU continue to follow the battle for BS&T with a keen interest. Although the views expressed on BU are our own, we welcome our readers to bring a balanced perspective on this and other issues. We find the BS&T saga to be very intriguing and regret like others have lamented the paucity of information coming from the stakeholders, but more so the passive way the press in Barbados is tackling this matter. We believe that the battle for BS&T represents more than a commercial transaction to be determined by its 3000 shareholders. The transaction must be of strategic interest to the country. BU therefore finds it amazing that the government of the country appears to be on board with this transaction without any fear of the consequences.
BU stand firm in its position that BS&T should be declared a “national asset” and the laws of Barbados be amended accordingly,
I think Barbados Underground would agree that the “small” shareholders need to be properly advised and made aware of what their real options are. None of the “analysts” have so far honestly laid out the pros and cons, and varying options available to the shareholders under the two options being offered to them by the would be suitors of BS&T. I’d like to add that the analysts should declare their potential conflicts of interest at the time they publish their articles. Mr. Chris Callender of Fortress Fund Managers should let the public know that BS&T owns 25% of the company that employs him.
Hey I’m not saying that this is directing his analyzes but hey be fair the public should be made aware of that “little’ fact.
However, to Sir Allan Fields who after being found out for trying to “slip” this merger past the public is still doing his utmost best at spin to achieve the “delivery” of BS&T to Neal and Massy. In the Business section of the Advocate, Monday, July 17, 2007, he stated that the two main offers on the table by the two conglomerates from Trinidad are like “Oranges and Apples”.
Now ,Sir Allan is “reported” to be intelligent; if that is the case, I believe he thinks that we are all below his level. I would like to say that while he tries to downplay the option of taking the cash offer from Ansa McAl, that offer gives the shareholders more choice than Sir Allan was and is giving them. He states that with the merger option “shareholders will have shares in a large company that is growing at a much faster rate (than BS&T)”.
What I want to ask Sir Allan is this.
Could the shareholders not take the $7.00 cash from Ansa McAl and buy shares in Neal & Massy of their own accord? From my vantage point they could benefit even greater because as pointed out, the exchange of shares in the merger gives the BS&T shareholders Neal & Massy shares at a value of BDS$5.51. To my mind the shareholders choices are greater then with the cash offer. They can utilize the same $5.51 to buy Neal and Massy or any other stock they chose and additionally have the option to invest the remaining $1.49 ($7.00-$5.51) at their own discretion.
Have they not gotten the same as if they accepted your merger Sir Allan? Wouldn’t you have explored this option yourself Sir Allan? Are you saying that your shareholders are so “daft” that they will take the cash and spend it all on consumer goods? Are these not the same shareholders who were “savvy” enough to invest in BS&T stock in the first place?
Stop trying to cloud the public and especially your shareholders minds with “non-issues” at a time when they are relying on you for sound professional and generally unbiased advice that is in their best interest.
The Chairman
Related BU Stories
Sir Allan Fields The Man Behind The Orchestration To Dump Barbados Shipping And Trading To The Trinidadians
What if Ralph Taylor was the CEO of BS&T instead of Anthony King?~Would Barbados Shipping and Trading Find Itself In This Predicament?
Senator Lynette Eastmond Shut Up!
Prime Minister Arthur Prefers A Neal And Massy Deal~Barbados Underground Say So
BS&T Going, Going, Soon To Be Gone~ The Advocate Newspaper Should Go Too
Leave a Reply to DavidCancel reply