Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Providence Resources?

  • 06-07-2009 7:03pm
    #1
    JOHNPT
    Closed Accounts Posts: 517 ✭✭✭


    Last week Tony OReilly reduced his holding in this company to 34% and JP Morgan increased there holding to 8%.
    What would be the opinion of readers here is it a positive sign that JP Morgan has increased shareholding or a negative sign that OReilly has reduced his holding?

    Thanks in advance for any opinions


Comments

  • #2
    Heraldoffreeent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,468 ✭✭✭Heraldoffreeent


    JOHNPT wrote: »
    Last week Tony OReilly reduced his holding in this company to 34% and JP Morgan increased there holding to 8%.
    What would be the opinion of readers here is it a positive sign that JP Morgan has increased shareholding or a negative sign that OReilly has reduced his holding?

    Thanks in advance for any opinions


    O'Reilly didn't reduce his holding as such, rather it was reduced by the issuance of 400 million shares approx, JPM took up half of this.
    The money raised was to pay off some debts, mainly a loan made last year by maquarrie.
    O'Reilly has participated in fundraising in the past, rights issues etc, at the moment he is probably focused on other matters.
    Positive or negative? One would like to think JPM dont do things rashly!!


Advertisement