Companies which uncapped SPPs after strong demand

ANZ, 2009: The offer document mentioned a cap of $350 million following the $2.5 billion placement at $14.40 but the bank accepted all $2.2 billion worth of applications from 178,000 holders or some 40% of the register. This remains a record 529% expansion of an SPP.

ANZ, 2015: The ANZ SPP ended up raising $720 million at $26.50, a healthy 14.37% discount to the earlier $2.5 billion institutional placement at $30.95 which subsequently became the subject of some ASIC enforcement action. Investors were offered a 2% discount to VWAP in the SPP and the original $500 million cap was lifted to $720 million so there were no scale backs.

ARENA REIT (ARF), August 2024: completed a $120m placement at $3.78, a 4.5% discount to the previous close of $3.96, and then embarked on a $20m SPP at the same price with no VWAP alternative. Current market cap around $1.5 billion. Ended up accepting the full $23.8m in applications to avoid any scale back.

Austin Engineering, 2014: $15,000 SPP at $3.20 after placement. In the money after Bradken offer lifted stock. Expanded $5m cap to $5.5 million. See announcement.

Australian Strategic Materials, 2022 (ASM): $30m placement at $1.73, a 12.4% discount to the previous close of $1.975, followed by a $4m placement to the chair requiring shareholder approval and a $10 million SPP with no VWAP alternative which was uncapped after the board elected to accept all $11.1 million in SPP applications without saying precisely how many shareholders participated.

Automotive Holdings, 2014: After raising $115 million from institutions at $3.49, attempted to limit SPP to just $10 million. After ASA representations, this was expanded by 200% to $30 million so no scaleback.

Bank of Queensland, 2019: announced a $25 million cap after completing a $250 million placement but then accepted all $90 million worth of applications at a 2% discount to VWAP which finished at $7.27 or a a 6.5% discount to what the institutions paid. See announcement.

Bega Cheese: Expanded a 2017 SPP from the capped amount of $37.5 million to accepted all $50.5 million in applications after receiving an ASA letter requesting the cap be lifted.

Bendigo & Adelaide Bank, 2014: $230 million selective institutional placement at $10.85 to fund Rural Finance purchase. First announced a soft $50 million cap and $5000 individual limit on the SPP but this was lifted to $7,500 after ASA representations. Only a $270m SPP would have retained pre-raising relativities between institutions and retail. They ended up accepting full $150 million so no scale-backs and 200% expansion on initial soft indicative cap.

Calix (CXL), 2022: initial capital raising was a $60m placement at $4.55 on October 19, an 11% discount to the previous close of $5.12. Stock then tanked after Albanese government cancelled $41m grant for carbon capture, use and storage projects. However, the subsequent $20m SPP had secondary pricing based on a 2.5% discount to VWAP. They accepted all $21.6m in SPP applications with the final price being $4.24, a 21c or 4.6% discount to the $4.60 placement price.

Cann Group (CAN), 2020: after a $14.3 million placement at 40c, launched a $10m SPP at the same price but ended up accepting all $25.6 million in applications bringing the total raising to $40.2 million and being a rare example (see list) of an SPP being larger than the earlier placement. The SPP participation disclosure was good with 2,793 applicants, comprising 14.5% of the nearly 20,000 shareholders.

Carnegie Clean Wave, 2017: announced a $6m SPP cap but then accepted an additional $9m plus added a $3m private placement to keep diluted shareholders sweet. See $18m raising outcome announcement.

Charter Hall Education, 2019: following a $120 million placement at $3.35, announced a $5 million cap on the SPP but ended up accepting all $19.29 million in applications. See announcement.

Charter Hall Retail (CQR), 2019: completed a $150 million institutional placement at $4.51 and announced a $10m cap on the subsequent SPP but ended up accepting all $14.7 million in applications. See announcement.

Charter Hall Retail (CQR), 2020: $275 million placement at $2.90 followed by a $25m SPP at the same price with no VWAP alternative. Lifted the cap and accepted all $29.4 million in applications. See outcome announcement.

Charter Hall Social Infrastructure (CQE), 2019: launched a $100 million placement at $3.35 and initially proposed limiting SPP to just $5 million but then accepted all $19.3 million in applications. See outcome announcement.

Charter Hall Social Infrastructure (CQE), 2020: $100m placement comprising 15% of issued capital at $2.20, followed by a $15m SPP at $2.20. Received $19.3m in applications, which were all commendably accepted.

Charter Hall Group, 2017: announced a $15 million cap on the SPP, following a $275 million placement. The company accepted all applications after $15.76 million in applications were received.

City Chic Collective (CCX), 2020: $80 million placement at $3.05, a 4.7% discount to the previous close, followed by a $10 million SPP at the same price of a 2% discount to VWAP over the final 5 days of the offer. The placement represents 13.1% of issued capital and the SPP is just 11.1% of the capital raising. Placement conclusion announcement silent on allocation policy or take-up by existing holders. Ended up accepting all $31 million in SPP applications with no scale back which was generous for retail shareholders.

Cyclopharm (CYC), 2024: $20m placement at $1.42, hefty 13.9% discount to the previous close of $1.69. Was followed by an under-sized $2m SPP for retail with no VWAP alternative pricing. Stock fell 15% to $1.40 on May 27 when trading resumed but later recovered. After strong demand, the company doubled the SPP to $4 million by accepting all applications.

Dexus, 2015: $400 million institutional placement at $7.32 and then announced a $50 million SPP but eventually accepted all $77.8 million in applications.

Dexus, 2019: responded positively to our request for an expansion of its $50 million Share Purchase Plan when it announced that it would be accepting all $63.9 million in applications with no scale back. This was still pretty light on after a $900 million placement.

DUET Group, 2014: announced a $30 million SPP cap in 2014 after the latest of a long line of institutional placements but then accepted all $43 million in SPP applications after representations from the ASA. Expanded by 43.3% to achieve no scale back.

GPT, 2019: lifted a $50 million cap on its SPP to $66.8 million and then used these excellent words in the outcome announcement: “The SPP offer was sent to 31,781 eligible Security holders and valid applications were received from 5,980 Security holders. This represents a participation rate of 18.8% and an average application worth approximately $11,170.”

Growthpoint, 2019: announced it was expanding its $15 million Share Purchase Plan to accept all $23 million in applications. The $15,000 offer was priced at $3.97 against a market price of around $4.36 when it issued. Growthpoint also adopted the new model for disclosing participation rates in the SPP with these words: “The SPP offer was sent to 3,958 eligible securityholders and 1,672 applications were received, providing a take-up rate of 42.24% and an average application of $14,086.”

Hansen Technologies 2015: aimed to raise $10 million under an SPP in conjunction with a $15 million placement. The company lifted the cap after receiving over the SPP was oversubscribed by approximately $2 million.

HMC Capital (HMC), 2024: the biggest shareholder in Sigma and emerging activist investor completed a $100m placement at $6.50 and will follow up with a $30 million SPP. Announcement failed to mention the previous close was $7.41 so that's a hefty 12.3% discount. Goldmans and UBS shared the easy fees. Ended up attracting $58.3m in applications and accepted the lot.

IAG, 2014: announced a $200 million cap on SPP in 2014 but then accepted all $236 million in application after representation from the ASA. Expanded by 18% after ASA representations to achieve no scale back.

Insurance Australia Group (IAG), 2020: a $650 million placement at $5.50 followed by a $100 million SPP which was uncapped when $125.9 million came through the door and was priced at $4.97 based on a 2% discount to the closing VWAP of $5.07.

Independence Group, 2016: announced a $30 million cap on its SPP, which followed a $300 million institutional placement. The company lifted the cap after receiving $31.4 million in subscriptions from shareholders.

Ingenia (INA), 2020: $150 million placement at $3.45 followed by a $25 million SPP. Only has about 3500 holders so the theoretical maximum for the SPP is $105 million and the company ended up accepting all $27.9 million in SPP applications, marginally lifting the $25 million cap. Only about 30% of shareholders participated even though it was more than 20% in the money.

Intelligent Monitoring Group (IMB), 2024: raised $20m in a placement at 48c to fund an acquisition and followed up with a $3m SPP which it expanded to $3.68m to avoid any scale back. The pricing was just a 4% discount to the previous close of 50c.

Invocare, 2020: announced a $50m cap on its SPP following a $200 million placement but then accepted all $74 million worth of applications. See announcement.

Macarthur Coal, 2009: After a $190 million placement at $6, the SPP offer document talked about a plan to raise $20-40m but then they accepted all $62 million in applications. See announcement.

Macquarie Atlas Roads, 2017: announced a capped $15 million SPP in March 2017 after doing a $185 million institutional placement and ended up accepting all $22 million in applications.

National Storage (NSR), 2020: $300 million placement at $1.57, followed by a $30m SPP which was expanded to $48 million with no scale back. See SPP outcome announcement which didn't include any participation data.

NIB (NHF), 2022: $150 million raising comprising a $135 million placement at a floor price of $6.90 which was the final price, followed by a $15m SPP at the lower of the placement price and a 2% discount to the VWAP. The annual report claims the company has 132,516 shareholders which means the theoretical maximum application is $3.975 billion and the capped amount of $15m only represents 0.37% of this amount or just $113 for each shareholder on average. Emailed the company on November 6 requesting expansion of the $15m cap and full disclosure of SPP participation data. Ended up being priced at $6.74 and accepted all $21.3m in applications without disclosing participation data.

Nickel Industries (NIC), 2023 a big $673 million raise all of which is via selective placement at $1.02 per share, a 9% discount to the previous close of $1.12, except for the $29m SPP at the end, which was expanded to $34.56m to avoid any scale back.

Norwest Energy, April 2022: the Perth-based company accepted all $3.324 million in SPP applications rather than scaling it back to the $3m cap.

Propel Funeral Partners (PFP), February 2024: $80m placement at $5.15, a 4.3% discount to the previous close, followed by an unfairly capped $10m SPP at the same price or a 2% discount to the VWAP in the 5 days leading up to the Feb 26 close. With 4,200 retail shareholders, the theoretical maximum for SPP applications was $126 million. More than 900 applicants offered up $20.5 million and the company accepted the lot, more than doubling the SPP and avoiding any scale back.

SCA Property Group, 2018: after a $262 million institutional placement to fund an acquisition, announced a $50 million SPP but ended up accepting all $111 million in applications at the $2.32 offer price. See announcement.

Seafarms, 2017: announced $2m SPP funding target with provision to accept an additional $2 million for a $4m cap but then accepted all $4.67m in applications.

Super Retail Group, 2010: $76 million institutional placement followed by $10,000 SPP at $4.80. Announced $10 million cap on SPP but ended up accepting all $12.4 million in applications after 24% expansion.

White Rock Minerals, 2020: initially announced a $1.5m cap on its SPP but then uncapped the offer and accepted all $10 million worth of applications at 3c, meaning the SPP ended up being almost double the earlier $5.85 million placement.

Transurban, 2019: $500 million placement at $14.70 (a $3.48% discount to market) followed by $15,000 SPP with a soft cap of $200 million which was priced at $14.64 based on the 2% discount to VWAP. Transurban accepted all $312 million worth of applications.

Westpac, 2019: announced a $500 million cap on its $30,000 SPP in late 2019 after a $2 billion placement and then accepted all $770 million in applications with no scaleback which were priced at a 2% discount to VWAP so retail investors only paid $24.20, compared with $25.32 for the placement. See announcement.

Wisetech, 2019: Announced the SPP at $20.90 was capped at $30 million but then expanded it to $35.9 million. See announcement.

Zip Co (ZIP), 2020: announced a $150 million capital raising comprising a $120 million placement priced at $5.34, a 4.1% discount to the previous close of $5.57, and a $30 million SPP which included a secondary pricing mechanism based on a 2% discount to VWAP. Under-written by Merrill Lynch with Shaw assisting. The placement outcome announcement talked about over-subscriptions but there was no reference to whether existing shareholders were given priority. The SPP received $56.7 million in applications which were accepted in full.

Copyright © 2024 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved

• share
  Share
  • 
    Facebook
  • 
    Twitter
  • email
    Email
  • print
    Print
  • link
    Copy Link
  • cancel
    Cancel