The Lemon Fool

US hedge fund Elliott Associates open letter to BLT board. Suggesting wholesale restructuring of the company.

The market seems to be interested - share price up 4.47% as I type. Not one of my better performers, so I am interested too. Particularly as some of Elliott's criticisms are clearly accurate.

Elliott holds 4.1% of BLT.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases ... 84104.html

I gather BHP have rejected the proposals but I don't suppose that's the end of the story. How would delisting from the LSE affect UK shareholders? Brenton Saunders, portfolio manager for BT Investment Management I Sydney, said the proposed changes to structure would not be cost-effective and could benefit London investors over those in Australia. Why would this be? This is yet another of my losers.

Bouleversee wrote:I gather BHP have rejected the proposals but I don't suppose that's the end of the story. How would delisting from the LSE affect UK shareholders? Brenton Saunders, portfolio manager for BT Investment Management I Sydney, said the proposed changes to structure would not be cost-effective and could benefit London investors over those in Australia. Why would this be? This is yet another of my losers.

I suspect that you are correct - not 'the end of the story'. Perhaps we can hope for a Unilever like effect, with BLT being galvanised into action?

BLT's detailed rebuttal is interesting. Surely Elliott can do the same sums, so what do they see that BLT doesn't (or refuses to)? Or vice-versa of course.

As for listing, commentary suggests that the primary listing will remain with the LSE - which may make any change to the DLC structure hard to get past the Australian regulators.

I hold, and observe events without any current intention of taking action.

Bouleversee wrote:I gather BHP have rejected the proposals but I don't suppose that's the end of the story. How would delisting from the LSE affect UK shareholders? Brenton Saunders, portfolio manager for BT Investment Management I Sydney, said the proposed changes to structure would not be cost-effective and could benefit London investors over those in Australia. Why would this be? This is yet another of my losers.

There is no suggestion as far as I know that BHP delist from the LSE. See the thread on the HYP Practical Board BHP under 'Pressure to cancel London listing' This was fully discussed there. What is being proposed is that the Dual Structure under which they have one parent in Australia, BHP Billiton Ltd and another in London, BHP Billiton plc be scrapped in the same way that Shell did some years ago and that Unilever is now considering. Brenton Saunders is simply quoting the BHP response to the Elliott letter.

Dod

Tthanks, Dod. I should have looked there first.