"DELISTED" Calata Corp.
email na tyo sa kinauukulan ara matigil na kalokohan ni boy gel
Reply
so ano na mangyayari with this delisting?
Reply
gg nga shareholders, tama hinala ko , damage control lang yang si alfred at mga minions nya
  
Reply
...p@1%#!!

Lessons from the Calata case

Not every story has a good ending. The ones about love and money almost always leave somebody’s heart torn into pieces. The world knows that by now. It’s a harsh truth older than time itself.

The story of Calata Corp. is no exception. There’s a lot of money involved and there isn’t just one person left out in the cold. Instead, many shareholders are broken hearted, concerned about their money after the Philippine Stock Exchange ruled with finality that Calata should be delisted from the official registry of the exchange.

The subject of their ire is now the PSE for delisting the company before it could do a tender offer of shares. Over the past 48 hours, shareholders filled the PSE’s Facebook page with hate messages. And the messages keep pouring in as I write this.

They did not expect the PSE to delist the company even before a tender offer could happen.

What happens if minority shareholders sell after delisting?

First, minority shareholders need to process getting the stock certificates, which is very hard especially for overseas Filipino shareholders.

Second, once a company is no longer listed, the applicable taxes involved in a sale, are the same as in selling real estate, which will be an additional unnecessary expense.
 
Many investors expected Calata’s delisting to happen, but only after a tender offer.

I broke the story on the company’s plan to do a gradual buyback of shares. Why it hasn’t happened remains a puzzle to me and I feel sorry for the minority shareholders.

I hope the company proceeds with its plan, if it’s the last thing it can to do for the shareholders who believed in it.

Last month, the PSE said they would wait for Calata’s tender offer timetable in order to set the exact delisting date. But this was not what happened.

One investor raised the question in a letter to me, “So, why after rendering a decision on the appeal, the PSE abruptly delisted Calata on Monday?”

“Why is it that the public shareholders feel betrayed instead of protected by the PSE. Who are they really punishing?” the shareholder said.

The chatty Alfred Reiterer also raised a similar question. “How can the PSE restore the trust of Calata shareholders and convince them that they are protected when they invest in stocks listed in the exchange?”

As markets opened on Monday, Calata was no longer part of the roster, stricken off the registry, vanished into oblivion.

The PSE’s side

The PSE, of course, is only doing its job. After being in hot water the past few years for allegedly letting some companies get away with bad corporate governance, the PSE, now headed by the no-nonsense Ramon Monzon, is making sure things have changed for the better.

Surely, it can’t ignore Calata’s violations. The PSE counted 55 violations of non-disclosure rules although Joseph Calata, the company chairman, had repeatedly said this was not intentional.

Calata’s plan

Chairman Calata must have had a busy weekend. When I asked him to comment on the delisting, he simply said it would be business as usual and that his company would just revert to being a private corporation.

Will he plan to list again in other jurisdictions? It’s possible. The plan to buyback shares also remains, but I don’t know for sure when this will finally happen.

The moral of the story

There are lessons to be learned in the Calata story, bitter as they may be. However way we look at it, stock market investing is just like gambling. Sure, making money in the stock market is fun – it’s like getting manna from heaven. I know how it feels, but greed always has a price. Sometimes, you just have to stop yourself from wanting more and get out immediately.

More importantly, you have to know the company you’re investing in and understand its business. You can’t rely on a tipster, who may just have heard the tip from another tipster and another.

It is easy to conclude that stock prices are being manipulated. But is it really the case all the time? Or could it be that investors are the ones being manipulated to buy the shares?

Stock price manipulation has happened and is probably happening as I write this.

In the case of Calata, it’s up to the Securities and Exchange Commission to prove it and win its case. It has already filed a complaint with the justice department against Calata for allegedly making false claims over a P65 billion casino project.

At this time, it’s good to remember the age-old rule in poker – if you’re playing the game and you look around the table and you can’t tell who the sucker is, then it must be you.

Life, in general, is one big gamble, whether you’re investing emotions or you’re investing money. Some, like the gods and spies, can’t distinguish between love and money. As for me, I don’t have enough money to gamble and lose. But I’m reckless with my heart. And that’s even worse.


source: http://www.philstar.com/business/2017/12...alata-case


Reply
...wala nang katapusan 'tong buset na 'to

PSE says Calata should have done more to protect investors

THE Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) said delisted firm Calata Corp. could have opted to buy back the shares of minority stockholders at a price lower than the book value, if it really wanted to protect its investors.

PSE President Ramon S. Monzon said there is no rule stating that all tender offers must be made at the book value, making it possible for Calata to buy out at least half of its minority shareholders.

“Nobody said that the tender offer price had to be at the book value. If he was sincere with trying to save your shareholder, if the book value is P3…then if you answer for half, then do it, if you really want to do it,” Mr. Monzon told reporters in a press chat last Wednesday.

A tender offer is at a fixed price, but usually at a premium over the current market price. It is also usually contingent on shareholders tendering a fixed number of their shares.

The bourse has officially kicked Calata out of the PSE last Dec. 11, after counting a total of 55 violations of PSE disclosure rules including the so-called black-out rule that prohibits principal officers and directors of a company to trade its shares within a prescribed period.

Some minority shareholders have previously asked the PSE to stop the delisting procedures in order to protect their investments.

Mr. Monzon denied the PSE did not consider the interests of minority shareholders, saying delisting Calata depended on the company’s decision on whether or not to proceed with the tender offer.

The PSE executive added Calata was given the option to voluntarily delist from the exchange.

“The PSE was prepared to voluntarily, not involuntarily, to just voluntary delist Calata if he would do the tender offer. Even though the penalty for his trading violations calls for involuntary, we were going to be flexible,” Mr. Monzon explained.

Companies that voluntarily delist from the PSE may reapply for listing six months after it exits the exchange. Those that undergo involuntary delisting procedures would have a five-year ban, while officers of the company are perpetually banned from joining the board of directors of a company seeking an initial public offering.

“So when he turned down our offer for a voluntary delisting, the delisting had to happen because of our rules. Otherwise, the SRC (Securities Regulation Code) will penalize us for not doing our work as an SRO (self-regulating organization),” Mr. Monzon said.

Asked whether the PSE will also be penalizing the brokers that executed the transaction that led to Calata’s violations, Mr. Monzon said: “I don’t think a broker is responsible for disclosure. That is the responsibility of the company or the compliance officer, but not the broker.”

“The broker is not required to disclose to the PSE or to CMIC (Capital Markets Integrity Corp.) or SEC how it has sold some shares. Kaya disclosure comes from the company, not the brokers,” he added, noting the CMIC is responsible for regulating trading participants.


source: http://bworldonline.com/pse-says-calata-...investors/


Reply
kahit CAL coins ko wala?
Reply
...walang katapusan

Calata minority owner urges SEC to halt firm’s cryptocurrency tack

AN investor of delisted firm Calata Corp. has asked the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to do its part in flagging a planned cryptocurrency offer.

Alfred Reiterer, chairman of Foreign Investors Advisory Group Ltd., and represents the group of complaining shareholders in Calata, said his group has yet to see any advisory from the SEC warning the public about the Calata’s initial coin offer (ICO).

“In the meantime, Mr. Calata [referring to Calata Corp. Chairman Joseph Calata] has started a marketing campaign on Facebook and is even advertising via Google ads [on a newspaper—not the BusinessMirror—on the coin offer]. I do not know if this ICO of Mr. Calata is legal or illegal, but I believe that the SEC should make a clear announcement on this matter,” Reiterer said in his letter to the SEC.

“By using a company incorporated in Hong Kong but having all employees in the Philippines, Mr. Joseph Calata definitely tries his best to avoid any kind of regulation, neither in Hong Kong nor in the Philippines,” he said in a letter to SEC Chairman Teresita Herbosa.  The ICO involves Black Cell Technology Ltd., a firm that operates the agriculture-related Krops, a mobile application that Calata earlier launched Krops in the Philippines, and which shares the same address with Calata. That firm is offering to the public 6.4 million tokens priced at 0.00105 etherium coins, or at $0.70 apiece. An etherium is one of the cryptocurrencies available to the public.

Reiterer said this should amount to P250 million in the local currency.

“I am sure that the SEC will protect the investing public based on Philippine law and regulations and I trust in your wisdom and integrity to make the right decisions,” Reiterer said in his letter.  Last October Calata dangled to its minority shareholders an exchange of Calata shares to cryptocurrency after the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) moved to have the company delisted after its owner and namesake traded company shares without the proper disclosure with the PSE, in violation of rules on trading undisclosed corporate developments.


source: https://businessmirror.com.ph/calata-min...ency-tack/


Reply
(01-04-2018, 09:16 AM)Ollie Wrote: ...walang katapusan

Calata minority owner urges SEC to halt firm’s cryptocurrency tack

AN investor of delisted firm Calata Corp. has asked the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to do its part in flagging a planned cryptocurrency offer.

Alfred Reiterer, chairman of Foreign Investors Advisory Group Ltd., and represents the group of complaining shareholders in Calata, said his group has yet to see any advisory from the SEC warning the public about the Calata’s initial coin offer (ICO).

“In the meantime, Mr. Calata [referring to Calata Corp. Chairman Joseph Calata] has started a marketing campaign on Facebook and is even advertising via Google ads [on a newspaper—not the BusinessMirror—on the coin offer]. I do not know if this ICO of Mr. Calata is legal or illegal, but I believe that the SEC should make a clear announcement on this matter,” Reiterer said in his letter to the SEC.

“By using a company incorporated in Hong Kong but having all employees in the Philippines, Mr. Joseph Calata definitely tries his best to avoid any kind of regulation, neither in Hong Kong nor in the Philippines,” he said in a letter to SEC Chairman Teresita Herbosa.  The ICO involves Black Cell Technology Ltd., a firm that operates the agriculture-related Krops, a mobile application that Calata earlier launched Krops in the Philippines, and which shares the same address with Calata. That firm is offering to the public 6.4 million tokens priced at 0.00105 etherium coins, or at $0.70 apiece. An etherium is one of the cryptocurrencies available to the public.

Reiterer said this should amount to P250 million in the local currency.

“I am sure that the SEC will protect the investing public based on Philippine law and regulations and I trust in your wisdom and integrity to make the right decisions,” Reiterer said in his letter.  Last October Calata dangled to its minority shareholders an exchange of Calata shares to cryptocurrency after the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) moved to have the company delisted after its owner and namesake traded company shares without the proper disclosure with the PSE, in violation of rules on trading undisclosed corporate developments.


source: https://businessmirror.com.ph/calata-min...ency-tack/

ang galing mo talaga vegeta, for the wrong reasons
Reply
...ayan na SEC warning

SEC warns public vs unregistered initial coin offerings

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has warned the investing public against dealing in unregistered securities, particularly the initial coin offerings (ICO) of companies hawking virtual currencies.

In an advisory issued on Tuesday, the SEC urged the public “to be vigilant when investing in this kind of investing activity and to take the necessary precautions in dealing with ICO entities.”

The SEC also warned those who invite or recruit other people to join or invest in unregistered investment contracts or securities that they may be held criminally liable or accordingly penalized in accordance with the Supreme Court decision in the case of SEC vs. Oudine Santos (G.R. No. 195542, March 19, 2014).

The advisory was issued on the heels of reports that certain companies, individuals or groups of persons were enticing the public, either through popular social media platforms or through their own independent website, to participate in so-called “initial coin offerings” and to purchase the corresponding “virtual currency”. It was earlier reported that the SEC, for instance, was investigating the ICO of Krops, an online marketplace for farm produce led by controversial businessman Joseph Calata.

Virtual currency refers to a digital representation of value issued and controlled by its developers and used and accepted among the members of a specific community or users.

ICO or initial coin offering is the first sale and issuance of a new virtual currency to the public usually for the purpose of raising capital for start-up companies or funding independent projects. In an ICO campaign, a percentage of the total available virtual currency is sold to interested buyers in exchange for any of the following: fiat currency; another virtual currency; or another asset or security.

“Based on the information gathered by the Commission, some of these new virtual currencies, based on the facts and circumstances surrounding their issuance, follow the nature of a security as defined by Section 3.1 of the Securities Regulation Code (SRC). However, unlike ordinary securities, these virtual currencies are neither guaranteed by any Central Bank nor backed by any commodity,” the SEC said.

Under Section 3.1(b) of the SRC, a security includes an “investment contract”. An investment contract is defined as a transaction or scheme whereby a person invests his money in a common enterprise and is led to expect profits primarily from the efforts of others. An investment contract is presumed to exist whenever a person seeks to use the money or property of others on the promise of profits.

“When a virtual currency is likewise analogous to any of the types of securities under Section 3.1 of the SRC, there is a strong possibility that the said virtual currency is a security under the jurisdiction of the SEC and has to be registered and necessary disclosures have to be made for the protection of the investing public,” the SEC said.

Where the scheme involves the sale of securities to the public, the SRC requires that these securities offered are duly registered and that the appropriate license and/or permit to sell securities to the public are issued to the corporation and/or its agents, pursuant to the provisions of Section 8 and 28 of the SRC.

“Likewise, those who act as salesmen, brokers, dealers or agents of ICO entities in selling or convincing people to invest in the investment scheme being offered by ICO companies including solicitations and recruitment through the internet must be registered with the SEC pursuant to Sec. 28 of the SRC,” the SEC said.

“If a promoter, issuer, broker or salesman guarantees returns, if a potential investment sounds too good to be true, or if you are pressured to act hastily, please exercise utmost caution and diligence and be wary of the risk that your investment might be lost,” the SEC said.


source: http://business.inquirer.net/243801/sec-...-offerings


Reply
ano pala mangyari pag di mapa uplift?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)