Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 370

Share Purchase Plans brickbats and bouquets

Introduction: Stephen Mayne is compiling the most comprehensive database of retail Share Purchase Plans (SPP), maintained on his website hereFirstlinks previously published Mayne's explanation of the inequity of many raisings, where large institutions were given the vast majority of the discounted allocation and retail investors were heavily scaled back. This week in The Eureka Report, he highlighted two stocks in the buy-now-pay-later sector. 

Afterpay received $136 million in applications, which was below the $150 million cap, and the SPP outcome announcement included:

"The SPP was sent to 53,465 eligible shareholders and 10,110 valid applications were received, representing a participation rate of 19% based registered holdings. The average application was $13,300."

Retail subscribers to Afterpay's $66 SPP received full allocations, and with the stock currently above $70, it was a contrast to the previous heavy scale backs. However, Mayne called Sezzle's treatment of retail shareholders 'appalling' when it announced a $79.1 million placement at $5.30, but with a $7.2 million cap in the retail SPP. Applications worth $78.2 million were received, but they stuck with the cap and will refund $71 million or 92% of application monies. The shares closed last week at $7.42, giving the undisclosed recipients of the $79 million placement paper gains of $31.6 million or 40%.

In this summary, Mayne gives out his brickbats (criticisms) and bouquets (praise) for the ways SPPs have been managed.

Brickbats

To Mesoblast, Temple & Webster, Open Pay, Salt Lake Potash, De Grey Mining and Red 5 Mining for all conducting institutional placements exceeding $20 million during the COVID-19 pandemic without offering retail investors a chance to participate on the same terms through a Share Purchase Plan. Retail investors have collectively lost billions through capital raising dilution so far in 2020 and placements, especially at big discounts, without SPPs are the most egregious form of offering.

To Super Retail Group, Southern Cross Media, Australian Finance Group and Ooh!media which banned retail investors from applying for any 'additional shares' in their discounted non-renounceable entitlement offers, meaning that the in-the-money offers all finished under-subscribed delivering windfall gains for the institutional underwriters and further diluting retail investors.

To the following companies for refusing to lift the caps on their Share Purchase Plans despite each of them being heavily oversubscribed:

  • Atlas Arteria: after a $420 million institutional placement, capped the SPP at $75 million and stuck rigidly to that cap even after receiving $180 million in applications.
  • Breville: after a $94 million placement, stuck with its $10 million SPP cap despite receiving $54.7 million in applications.
  • Capitol Health: after a $30 million placement, stuck rigidly to its $10 million cap, scaling everyone back to a maximum of around $16,300. Also failed to disclose total applications.

There was a larger cohort of companies which expanded their capped SPPs in the face of strong demand but still imposed heavy scale-backs. A couple deserving brickbats for very limited expansions include Megaport which expanded its SPP from $15 million to $22.5 million but still refunded 77% of all applications after $99 million came through the door. Similarly, Dicker Data only expanded its SPP from $5 million to $15 million after $53.7 million came through the door meaning that 72% of all applications were refunded.

Surely a base case for popular SPPs should be that at least half the applications are accepted.

Bouquets

To all the companies which improved disclosure to give investors greater insight into the participation rates for their Share Purchase Plans. Specifically, here are ten examples of healthy SPP participation rates above 20% which wouldn’t have been previously disclosed. Annoyingly, particularly for smaller holders, all of these offers (with the exception of Next DC) were scaled back based on size of shareholding:

  • Ramsay Health Care: 52% (41,877 out of 80,273 applied for the SPP)
  • Next DC: 51% (8,684 out of 17,015)
  • Cochlear: 45% (16,651 out of 36,724)
  • Breville:25% (3,104 out of 7,015)
  • Lend Lease:7% (24,700 out of 60,688)
  • Atlas Arteria:7% (9,300 out of 26,000)
  • Iress:4% (2,800 out of 9,200)
  • NAB: 25% (155,000 out of 615,000)
  • United Malt: 25% (3,273 out of 13,092)
  • Newcrest Mining: 23% (15,574 out of 54,107)

To all the companies which cranked up the regularity and detail of their ASX disclosures to keep investors fully informed about the impact of COVID-19. Payments company Tyro was a standout, effectively releasing monthly management accounts to the ASX showing how payments were travelling. Qantas was also commendable in terms of making regular and comprehensive disclosures to the market as events unfolded. Qantas CEO Alan Joyce also deserve credits for working for free during the June quarter.

Whilst renounceable pro-rata capital raising offers are preferred, these have been few and far between during the recent deluge of offers. This means the better structured non-renounceable pro-rata raisings are those that allow retail investors to apply for an unlimited number of additional shares to take up any shortfall left by fellow retail investors. In this regard, we give bouquets to the likes of Dacian Gold, Decmil, Reece, Kathmandu and Novonix for not limiting 'overs'.

To Ingenia, ARENA REIT, Charter Hall Retail, Charter Hall Social Infrastructure and National Storage for uncapping their SPPs after receiving total applications which exceeded the capped amount disclosed in the offer document. There have been far too many heavy scale-backs in 2020, so companies which end up doing an uncapped SPP should be congratulated, particularly if it means retail shareholders collectively increase their overall ownership of the company at the expense of the normally preferred institutional investors. Kudos also to Reece and Next DC for offering uncapped SPPs, which were always going to accept all applications from the outset.

 

Stephen Mayne is the Founder of Crikey, and also updates data and writes at The Mayne Report. This article first appeared in the ASA's Equity Magazine of July/August 2020.

 

8 Comments
Stephen Campbell
August 16, 2020

I rang the Super Retail Group SPP information line to complain about limiting retail shareholder applications and giving a 'free ride' to the underwriters and received the biggest load of garbage as an answer that did not even answer mine question. So much for concerns from retail investors.

matt
August 16, 2020

If all of the register get offered shares in equal proportion to their holding, I don’t see the issue. I think it’s only untoward when it sways from that. exclusive insto placements (also eg Rhipe) are not fair and should be banned unless there is an urgent cash burn issue - in which case they should make a subsequent retail offer anyway. If there’s undersubscriptions as to who takes up the surplus it would be nice to offer it to all but not so important because ultimately if you took your pro-rata offer up in the first place then whether another retail punter takes up his/her allocation or an insto takes it up instead is moot from a dilution perspective.

John Lansell
August 16, 2020

If I remember correctly several years ago in a Share Purchase Plan, a company/share registry office(both) refused to electronically refund the surplus of of SPP after I had sent the original money by that method. They will sent a cheque and advised that this takes upwards of two weeks to process and then the clearing. The phone calls/emails ended with a 'get lost'. And ever since that time I love arguing with slow bureaucratic share registries or I don't anymore trying to converse with the individual company's CEO.

Alan
August 13, 2020

We can gripe all we like about some of these practices, but ultimately it is the current rules that allow them. So much for a share being worth the same as any other share in the business. With the technology available these days, it shouldn't be too hard to make the opportunity available to all shareholders pro rata.

As for Alan Joyce deserving credit for "working for free during the June quarter", come back down to earth Stephen.

peter riddell
August 13, 2020

Again the management and boards of these companies show little regard for their loyal small shareholders. Increased equity should be offered to shareholders first not the mates of the CEO and board.

Been there B4
August 13, 2020

Regrettably a large proportion of shareholders ignore SPPs ( and other corporate actions) as they are not really engaged with their investments. Also the receipt of notification of corporate actions "by email" makes it easy to overlook.

As an adviser, where possible, I let my clients know about upcoming SPPs and to look out for the documentation ... and what-do -you-know, most of them take action.

Another creepy trick is to close SPPs when the target funds are reached, and before the scheduled closing date ... of course this is allowable because it is in the small print. So the "winners" are the smarties who are ahead in this game.

I agree with S Mayne that it is inequitable for retail shareholders to miss out on cap raisings arranged as placements to instos at discounted prices with no retail offer.

Yes, a renounceable rights entitlement issue is the equitable way to go, but it takes more time.

Richard W
August 13, 2020

Has Mr Mayne done any research as to finding out how companies determine the size of their SPP offering cap? It seems to me from Mr Mayne's findings that the figure seems to be random!

Gary M
August 13, 2020

And there's no indication from the company at the start of the SPP that even if only 20% of retail shareholders participate, they will send back 75% of your money. Meanwhile, you have no idea how much has been committed to the company for a month when you could have had your money invested in the market.

 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

Small investors miss out as institutions and banks cash in

Longest positive run for Australian shares since WWII

Let's make this clear again ... franking credits are fair

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Unexpected results in our retirement income survey

Who knew? With some surprise results, the Government is on unexpected firm ground in asking people to draw on all their assets in retirement, although the comments show what feisty and informed readers we have.

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

Three all-time best tables for every adviser and investor

It's a remarkable statistic. In any year since 1875, if you had invested in the Australian stock index, turned away and come back eight years later, your average return would be 120% with no negative periods.

The looming excess of housing and why prices will fall

Never stand between Australian households and an uncapped government programme with $3 billion in ‘free money’ to build or renovate their homes. But excess supply is coming with an absence of net migration.

Five stocks that have worked well in our portfolios

Picking macro trends is difficult. What may seem logical and compelling one minute may completely change a few months later. There are better rewards from focussing on identifying the best companies at good prices.

Six COVID opportunist stocks prospering in adversity

Some high-quality companies have emerged even stronger since the onset of COVID and are well placed for outperformance. We call these the ‘COVID Opportunists’ as they are now dominating their specific sectors.

Latest Updates

Retirement

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

Interviews

Sean Fenton on marching to your own investment tune

Is it more difficult to find stocks to short in a rising market? What impact has central bank dominance had over stock selection? How do you combine income and growth in a portfolio? Where are the opportunities?

Compliance

D’oh! DDO rules turn some funds into a punching bag

The Design and Distribution Obligations (DDO) come into effect in two weeks. They will change the way banks promote products, force some small funds to close to new members and push issues into the listed space.

Shares

Dividends, disruption and star performers in FY21 wrap

Company results in FY21 were generally good with some standout results from those thriving in tough conditions. We highlight the companies that delivered some of the best results and our future  expectations.

Fixed interest

Coles no longer happy with the status quo

It used to be Down, Down for prices but the new status quo is Down Down for emissions. Until now, the realm of ESG has been mainly fund managers as 'responsible investors', but companies are now pushing credentials.

Investment strategies

Seven factors driving growth in Managed Accounts

As Managed Accounts surge through $100 billion for the first time, the line between retail, wholesale and institutional capabilities and portfolios continues to blur. Lower costs help with best interest duties.

Retirement

Reader Survey: home values in age pension asset test

Read our article on the family home in the age pension test, with the RBA Governor putting the onus on social security to address house prices and the OECD calling out wealthy pensioners. What is your view?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2021 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.