National Grid Rights Issue

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

I can't see any sizeable short position on NG. from this site https://shorttracker.co.uk/search/ my go-to for checking short interest on a UK firm.

Matt

[IanTHughes]

You are not being "forced" to do anything. You are being "offered" the chance to add to you holding of National Grid PLC (NG) by taking up the extra shares at what some might suggest is an attractive price. If, for whatever reason, you do not wish to take up the offer, ignore it! Sell/Lapse the Nil Paid and invest the funds elsewhere.

I say again, you are not being "forced" to do anything, why do you think otherwise?

Shareholders clearly are being forced to make a decision which may not suit their individual circumstances. Only if the rights issue had not been devised would it be true to suggest that shareholders are not being 'forced' to do anything.

Shareholders are being "offered" the chance to invest further funds in National Grid PLC (NG), they are most certainly not being "forced" to take such action, or indeed any other action. On the contrary every shareholder can "freely choose" to accept the offer being made, or take any other option, or indeed do nothing. Nobody is being "forced" to do anything!

Enjoy!


Ian

[monabri]

I appreciate you are new here but this thread is about Company News. It isn't about individuals and what you are doing etc. There are other places for that. I haven't reported the post but "off-topics" in this place will be removed.

Sorry to ruin the party Dealtn, I thought it only polite to answer the question. I'll delete my account in a few days when I feel I don't need anymore guidance from the kind members.

I think a new poster can be forgiven for asking a question in the "wrong place"....but they are not alone in doing this. Murkslayer is obviously perturbed about NG and the Rights Issue. If Terry (TJH) had been concerned about the post he would have most likely intervened. New posters are to be encouraged.

[IanTHughes]

I've spent a bit more time thinking about the final option ("tail-swallow") for the NG. rights issue. Well at least as is presented by my broker. That being

I elect to sell sufficient of my NATIONAL GRID Nil Paid Rights to exercise the remaining Rights. I believe that in addition to tail-swallowing this is also know "cashless takeup of the rights".

Using the following as an example, that is supposing I have 5 Nil paid rights.

NATIONAL GRID NEW ORD 12 204/473PNP 10/06  (NGPN) 	
5 	xxx 	xxx 	*204.30p

Should I opt for the above (tail-swallow, cashless takeup), would I be correct in saying that then my broker will:

1. sell 4 of the rights yielding 817.2p
2. buy the 1 remaining right.
3. the result of this complete transaction, being 1 extra NG. share and 817.2 - 645 = 172p in change

Is this correct?

Do not ignore the commission that your broker may charge.

Enjoy!


Ian

[dealtn]

Sorry to ruin the party Dealtn, I thought it only polite to answer the question. I'll delete my account in a few days when I feel I don't need anymore guidance from the kind members.

I think a new poster can be forgiven for asking a question in the "wrong place"....but they are not alone in doing this. Murkslayer is obviously perturbed about NG and the Rights Issue. If Terry (TJH) had been concerned about the post he would have most likely intervened. New posters are to be encouraged.

Precisely.

Explore the whole site. Welcome to all the wisdom of multiple members with 1,000s of posts behind them of useful advice and encouragement to others, across multiple boards, and 1,000s of threads. Use the search facility to find previous examples of Rights issues, and their practicalities

But as is explained in the guidance, this isn't the place, and others should know better too.

Moderator Message:
We have to tolerate a certain amount of thread drift, and there is no reason why this action by National Grid should not be discussed here. Indeed, there are good reasons why it should be. By your own standards, your own post is off topic.

TJH

[ReformedCharacter]

Shareholders clearly are being forced to make a decision which may not suit their individual circumstances. Only if the rights issue had not been devised would it be true to suggest that shareholders are not being 'forced' to do anything.

Shareholders are being "offered" the chance to invest further funds in National Grid PLC (NG), they are most certainly not being "forced" to take such action, or indeed any other action. On the contrary every shareholder can "freely choose" to accept the offer being made, or take any other option, or indeed do nothing. Nobody is being "forced" to do anything!

Ian

Just because you can argue that taking no action is an option, shareholders are forced to consider options which they did not have to before the rights issue was announced. Some people for example may not have the funds available in an ISA. I would 'freely choose' to be in the same position that I was before the rights issue was announced, so I am forced to make a decision one way or another. Just because I have a 'free choice' to make one of a series of options does not mean that I am not forced to choose one of them, even if that option is to do nothing.

Enjoy!

RC

[IanTHughes]

Shareholders are being "offered" the chance to invest further funds in National Grid PLC (NG), they are most certainly not being "forced" to take such action, or indeed any other action. On the contrary every shareholder can "freely choose" to accept the offer being made, or take any other option, or indeed do nothing. Nobody is being "forced" to do anything!

Just because you can argue that taking no action is an option, shareholders are forced to consider options which they did not have to before the rights issue was announced. Some people for example may not have the funds available in an ISA. I would 'freely choose' to be in the same position that I was before the rights issue was announced, so I am forced to make a decision one way or another. Just because I have a 'free choice' to make one of a series of options does not mean that I am not forced to choose one of them, even if that option is to do nothing.

Each shareholder can take no action, therefore no shareholder is "forced" to take any action.

QED

Enjoy!


Ian

[ReformedCharacter]

Just because you can argue that taking no action is an option, shareholders are forced to consider options which they did not have to before the rights issue was announced. Some people for example may not have the funds available in an ISA. I would 'freely choose' to be in the same position that I was before the rights issue was announced, so I am forced to make a decision one way or another. Just because I have a 'free choice' to make one of a series of options does not mean that I am not forced to choose one of them, even if that option is to do nothing.

Each shareholder can take no action, therefore no shareholder is "forced" to take any action.

QED

Enjoy!

Ian

Each shareholder is forced to choose an option, even if that option is to do nothing it is still a choice which has to be made.

QED

Enjoy!

RC

[IanTHughes]

Each shareholder can take no action, therefore no shareholder is "forced" to take any action.

QED

Each shareholder is forced to choose an option, even if that option is to do nothing it is still a choice which has to be made

What I said was that no "action" is forced upon anybody! I know it to be true because when dealing with a Rights Issue, nobody forces me to take any "action" at all.

I appreciate that with you it is different, maybe you should change your broker? Just an idea!

Enjoy!


Ian

[ReformedCharacter]

Each shareholder is forced to choose an option, even if that option is to do nothing it is still a choice which has to be made

What I said was that no "action" is forced upon anybody! I know it to be true because when dealing with a Rights Issue, nobody forces me to take any "action" at all.

I appreciate that with you it is different. Maybe you should change your broker? Just an idea!

Enjoy!

Ian

What I said was that considering and choosing a choice is forced even if you choose not to take any subsequent action.

I appreciate that with you it is different. Maybe you should try not trying to have the last word in every exchange, perhaps it's an ego thing. Just an idea!

Enjoy!

RC

[IanTHughes]

What I said was that no "action" is forced upon anybody! I know it to be true because when dealing with a Rights Issue, nobody forces me to take any "action" at all.

I appreciate that with you it is different. Maybe you should change your broker? Just an idea!

What I said was that considering and choosing a choice is forced even if you choose not to take any subsequent action.

So it is the same for you, no action is forced upon you after all.

Why when responding to my comment about not being forced into any action did you talk about choices? I never mentioned not having to make a choice, that was purely down to you.

Enjoy!


Ian

[ReformedCharacter]

Why when responding to my comment about not being forced into any action did you talk about choices? I never mentioned not having to make a choice, that was purely down to you.

Enjoy!

Ian

Because making a choice is generally considered an action, not difficult is it?

Enjoy!

RC

[Arborbridge]

Perhaps we need a "Semantics Corner" board

[IanTHughes]

Why when responding to my comment about not being forced into any action did you talk about choices? I never mentioned not having to make a choice, that was purely down to you.

Because making a choice is generally considered an action, not difficult is it?

I have never been forced to make a choice! Can't quite see how anyone - broker, market, company - could force any shareholder to do anything they did not want to do.

Anyway, thanks for the warning. Rest assured, from now on I shall watch out very carefully for any sign of my being forced to do anything!

I shall be particularly vigilant when presented with a Rights Issue. I would not want to be forced to take part in a Rights Issue when I had no desire to do so! No sir!

Enjoy!


Ian

[Arborbridge]

Because making a choice is generally considered an action, not difficult is it?

I have never been forced to make a choice! Can't quite see how anyone - broker, market, company - could force any shareholder to do anything they did not want to do.

Anyway, thanks for the warning. Rest assured, from now on I shall watch out very carefully for any sign of my being forced to do anything!

Enjoy!


Ian

I have never been forced to make a choice! At the risk of prolonging ....

Is that really true? In this case you've been offerred a choice of several futures- you either choose one actively or allow the status quo to make the choice for you. I cannot see how the change in circumstance is NOT forcing you.

Still, as I say, this is very much semantics and hardly worth getting into a sweat about.

Arb.

[tjh290633]

Moderator Message:
Things have got a little heated on this thread. Dealtn has a habit of reporting posts which he considers are off topic and are usually closed without action by me. However it would be better if intemperate language and acronyms are avoided.

TJH

[MrFoolish]

Has anyone calculated what Mr Market made of this rights issue? I mean percentage change from your old holding to this new (temporary) combined holding. I imagine it will be negative...

[ayshfm1]

The market takes a dim view. Circa 23% loss.

And who can blame him?

Return on investment is decided by a political entity which is more interested in placating consumers than it is in fostering a return on investment.
The probability that fiscally incontinent populist kleptocrats coming to power shortly, who may nationalise
Massive loans being taken on, the rights issue only covers a fraction of what is going to be spent.

[EthicsGradient]

Has anyone calculated what Mr Market made of this rights issue? I mean percentage change from your old holding to this new (temporary) combined holding. I imagine it will be negative...

It's about a 16% drop at this point, from the price before the announcement: (24 * 8.894 + 7 * 2) / (24 * 11.275) = 0.84

[ayshfm1]

Our math differs

I didn't know the price before the rights issue, so I used this which maybe wrong...

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/co ... 48265.html

The issue is being priced at 645p, a near 40% discount to last night’s close suggesting it must have been a struggle to persuade investors to stump up the cash, even though it is fully underwritten.

£6.45 = circa 60%, thus 100% ie the price before the rights issue was £10.75 according to them

Then I went rather specific I hold 2217 of them and have been given 646. They are valued in my account currently at £17,090.38 (770.8787p ) and £1,242.59 (192.3514p) respectively for a combined value of £18332.97 at £10.75 per share before the issue, they were worth £23832.75 for a loss of £5499.78. 1% of 23832.75 = 238.32. £5499.78/238.78 gives 23%

Ouch.