Companies which lifted capped SPPs


August 10, 2019

This list tracks companies which announced a cap on the overall size of an SPP and then lifted it when faced with over-subscriptions.

Adelaide Brighton, 2009: Capped SPP at $15 million but expanded this by 90% to $28.5 million after being overwhelmed with $57 million worth of applications. Investors received a minimum $1000 and then a 50% scale back. This followed an $85 million placement to institutions at $1.78.

ANZ, 2009: The offer document mentioned a cap of $350 million following the $2.5 billion placement at $14.40 but the bank accepted all $2.2 billion worth of applications from 178,000 holders or some 40% of the register. This remains a record 529% expansion of an SPP.

Asciano, 2010: The SPP was pitched at $100 million after a $1.58 billion institutional placement and circa $800 million entitlement offer, but after applications worth $290 million from 31,000 holders, this SPP cap was slightly increased by 1.5% to $101.5 million so all applicants could receive 35% of their application.

Atlas Iron, 2009: there was a $105 million placement and the SPP offer document mentioned an $11.7 million cap plus the formula for any scaleback but after applications worth $29.75 million were received, this was increased to $14.8 million so the scale back was only 50%. Offer expanded by 26.5%.

Austin Engineering, 2014: $15,000 SPP at $3.20 after placement. In the money after Bradken offer lifted stock. Expanded $5m cap to $5.5 million. See announcement.

Automotive Holdings, 2014: After raising $115 million from institutions at $3.49, attempted to limit SPP to just $10 million. After ASA representations, this was expanded by 200% to $30 million so no scaleback.

Bega Cheese: Expanded a 2017 SPP from the capped amount of $37.5 million to accepted all $50.5 million in applications after receiving an ASA letter requesting the cap be lifted.

Bendigo & Adelaide Bank, 2014: $230 million selective institutional placement at $10.85 to fund Rural Finance purchase. First announced a soft $50 million cap and $5000 individual limit on the SPP but this was lifted to $7,500 after ASA representations. Only a $270m SPP would have retained pre-raising relativities between institutions and retail. They ended up accepting full $150 million so no scale-backs and 200% expansion on initial soft indicative cap.

Carnegie Clean Wave, 2017: announced a $6m SPP cap but then accepted an additional $9m plus added a $3m private placement to keep diluted shareholders sweet. See $18m raising outcome announcement.

Charter Hall Education, 2019: following a $120 million placement at $3.35, announced a $5 million cap on the SPP but ended up accepting all $19.29 million in applications. See announcement.

Charter Hall Retail (CQR), 2019: completed a $150 million institutional placement at $4.51 and announced a $10m cap on the subsequent SPP but ended up accepting all $14.7 million in applicatoins. See announcement.

Charter Hall Group, 2017: announced a $15 million cap on the SPP, following a $275 million placement. The company accepted all applications after $15.76 million in applications were received.

Credit Corp, 2019: announced a $10 million cap on its SPP after doing a $125 million placement at $20.45 and then lifted the SPP to $15 million but still only accepted an 39% of each shareholder's $15,000 application. See scale back announcement.

Collection House, 2013: did a $13 million placement and originally announced $6m cap on SPP but lifted this to $7m although it remained heavily scaled back, without disclosure of the total applications.

Crane Group, 2009: $40 million placement at $7.50 and the company announced individuals were limited to $9000 each and $10 million collectively in the follow-up SPP. However, after it received $27 million in applications, the scale back only reduced this to $22.8 million so that everyone received a minimum 200 shares worth $1500 and were then scaled back by 20% of everything above that amount. The offer was expanded by 128%.

Dexus, 2015: $400 million institutional placement at $7.32 and then announced a $50 million SPP but eventually accepted all $77.8 million in applications.

Dexus, 2019: responded positively to our request for an expansion of its $50 million Share Purchase Plan when it announced that it would be accepting all $63.9 million in applications with no scale back. This was still pretty light on after a $900 million placement.

DUET Group, 2014: announced a $30 million SPP cap in 2014 after the latest of a long line of institutional placements but then accepted all $43 million in SPP applications after representations from the ASA. Expanded by 43.3% to achieve no scale back.

Dyesol, 2013: $15,000 SPP at 16.6c seeking up to $2m. Expanded to $4m, heavily oversubcribed but everyone received 18% of application. The most in the money SPP we've ever encountered.

GPT, 2019: lifted a $50 million cap on its SPP to $66.8 million and then used these excellent words in the outcome announcement: “The SPP offer was sent to 31,781 eligible Security holders and valid applications were received from 5,980 Security holders. This represents a participation rate of 18.8% and an average application worth approximately $11,170.”

Growthpoint, 2019: announced it was expanding its $15 million Share Purchase Plan to accept all $23 million in applications. The $15,000 offer was priced at $3.97 against a market price of around $4.36 when it issued. Growthpoint also adopted the new model for disclosing participation rates in the SPP with these words: “The SPP offer was sent to 3,958 eligible securityholders and 1,672 applications were received, providing a take-up rate of 42.24% and an average application of $14,086.”

Hansen Technologies 2015: aimed to raise $10 million under an SPP in conjunction with a $15 million placement. The company lifted the cap after receiving over the SPP was oversubscribed by approximately $2 million.

Hills Industries, 2009: aimed to raised $10m but after receiving $33.8 million in applications, expanded this to $16.7 million and applied a 50% scale back based on size of application. See announcement.

Independence Group, 2016: announced a $30 million cap on its SPP, which followed a $250 million institutional placement. The company lifted the cap after receiving $31.4 million in subscriptions from shareholders.

IAG, 2014: announced a $200 million cap on SPP in 2014 but then accepted all $236 million in application after representation from the ASA. Expanded by 18% after ASA representations to achieve no scale back.

Invocare, 2019: announced a $65 million placement at $14 with a capped $20 million SPP to follow and ended up accepting $22.8 million of the $29.7 million in applications so that all applicants could receive $10,000 worth of shares. See announcement.

Macarthur Coal, 2009: After a $190 million placement at $6, the SPP offer document talked about a plan to raise $20-40m but then they accepted all $62 million in applications. See announcement.

Macquarie Atlas Roads, 2017: announced a capped $15 million SPP in March 2017 after doing a $185 million institutional placement and ended up accepting all $22 million in applications.

The Reject Shop, 2013: $15,000 SPP at fixed price of $16.20 after $30 million placement to fund store rollout. Offer document mentioned $10 million cap but after $25.5 million in applications this was expanded by 40% to $14 million.

RCR Tomlinson, 2017: completed a $75m placement then announced $15m cap on SPP but lifted this marginally to $15.6m after receiving $17.6m in applications.

QBE, 2014: SPP was initially capped at $150 million but this was expanded by 33.3% to $200 million after a threatened board tilt. Original placement was $650 million at $10.10.

SCA Property Group, 2018: after a $262 million institutional placement to fund an acquisition, announced a $50 million SPP but ended up accepting all $111 million in applications at the $2.32 offer price. See announcement.

Seafarms, 2017: announced $2m SPP funding target with provision to accept an additional $2 million for a $4m cap but then accepted all $4.67m in applications.

Super Retail Group, 2010: $76 million institutional placement followed by $10,000 SPP at $4.80. Announced $10 million cap on SPP but ended up accepting all $12.4 million in applications after 24% expansion.

Treasury Group, 2014: completed a $30 million placement at $10.25 and then announced a $5 million SPP. After receiving $27 million in applications, doubled the SPP to $10 million and all applicants received 37% of their application. See announcement.

Western Areas, 2014: announced a $15 million cap on a 2014 SPP but then ended up lifting it by 18% by accepting $17.7m of $18.8m in application after representations from ASA and an administrative error.

Wisetech, 2019: Announced the SPP at $20.90 was capped at $30 million but then expanded it to $35.9 million. See announcement.