Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : London Pacific Group - LPGL doubles... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rupert1 who wrote (170)	4/16/1999 5:53:00 AM
From: rupert1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 737

The location and structure of LPG suggests that it has been structured to suit the requirements of the main shareholder. A suggestion arises from what is know that LPG is virtually under the control of Treugger through his 25% shareholding and his influence on the 21% held by the LPG share scheme. Further enquiry should concentrate on whether he has declared a beneficial interest in some of the shares owned by other parties, or is related to them in any way. I have read the pleadings in the 1985 lawsuit against Treugger. Basically it alleges that he advised the first party to invest in a third party without disclosing to the first party that he was being paid a fee for so doing. It was found to be non-judiciable in the US because LPH was Jersey company. The decision to issue US ADR's is unusual for a company of this small size. It suggests that when it was done the plan was to use the NASDAQ to raise capital. But there is a competing suggestion that the company is now more interested to move towards de facto privatization. The buying back of 10% or more of the stock, the lack of self-promotion and the fact that 82.32% of the stock is held by a very small number of shareholders.