Companies which refused to expand capped SPPs

May 7, 2020

This list tracks companies which refused to lift capped SPPs. Also, check out this list of companies which partially lifted caps but still imposed a scale back, along with this list of those which accepted all applications and imposed no cap.

AWE, 2017: $15,000 SPP at 50c closing on December 14. 7,669 holders so maximum application $265m chasing $10m. Received $76m in applications and scale back formula involved everyone getting at least $500 worth. See announcement.

Boart Longyear, 2009: $15,000 SPPs at 27c. Company received $US118m in applications from 10,000 shareholders but scaled this back to $US75 million with everyone getting around 65% of their application. See announcement.

Cedar Woods, 2014: $15,000 SPP at $6.80. Scaled back by two thirds after received $15m in applications. Stuck with $5m cap and scaled back based on size of applications. See announcement.

CFS Retail, 2014: $15,000 SPP at $1.782 after placement. Scaled back everyone to about $2100. The $15 million SPP received $73 million in applications and there was no expansion in the cap. See announcement.

Credit Corp, 2019: $15,000 SPP at $20.45 placement price or a 2.5% discount to VWAP. Closed well in the money. Investors were scaled back to 39% or 288 new shares based on size of application. See announcement.

Fletcher Building, 2009: The $NZ100 million SPP at $4.15 followed a $NZ405 million placement and was scaled back with applicants receiving 56.56% if they applied for the maximum of $A9000. See scale back announcement.

Gindalbie Metals, 2010: $10,000 SPP at 93c, with most applicants scaled back to $8700. Initially announced capital raising of up to $206 million with the SPP capped at $20 million. Received $26 million in applications and scaled everyone by about 25%. See conclusion announcement.

GUD Holdings: $15,000 SPP at $8.30 or a 2.5% discount to market. Scaled everyone back by 55%. This followed a $40 million institutional placement and the offer document flagged a $15 million cap which was maintained. See scale back formula.

Megaport, 2019: completed a $50m placement at $4 and then received $47.6 million worth of applications for the subsequent SPP but stuck with the $10 million cap. See announcement. Not clear on the scale back formula.

NAB: stuck with a $750 million cap on its SPP in 2009 despite receiving $2.6 billion in applications. See this announcement promising all applicants at least $500 worth of shares and then this subsequent letter from chairman Michael Chaney.

Pinnacle Investment Management, 2018: announced a $10 million cap and stuck with it despite receiving $22 million in applications. All applicants received 56% of their application. See announcement.

QBE Insurance, 2009: The $100 million offer at $5000 a pop received $226 million in applications and QBE came up with a unique scale back formula whilst sticking with the $100m cap.

Seek, 2009: $5000 SPP at $2.60 following a $100 million placement which included $35 million to the Bassat founders and the Packer interests. There was no cap in the original announcement but $15 million appeared in the offer document. Received $20.4 million in applications and the scale back was based on the size of your holding.

SRG Group: $15,000 SPP at $1.60 after acquisition. $9.8m applied for $4m with no increase in the cap. See announcement on scale back based on size of holding.

Villa World, 2013: $15,000 SPP at $1.60. Received $9.8 million in applications but decided to stick with $5m cap with everyone receiving 49% of what they applied for. See announcement.

Webjet, 2013: $15,000 SPP at $3.60 after $25m placement to fund acquisition. Capped at $5m and received $26m in applications. Investors were scaled back to 19% of application. See scale back announcement.

Western Areas, 2013: $15,000 SPP at $3.80. Scale back based on size of holding. See scale back announcement as held the line with $15 million cap in offer document after receiving $26 million in applications.