Notes From The Margin

July 26, 2007

Banks Holdings Whacks Ansa McAl – Promotes Neal & Massy.

In a stinging rebuke in this mornings papers Banks Holdings CEO vehemently denied that they supported Ansa McAl’s bid to take over Barbados Shipping and Trading. In a full page advertisement in the Daily Nation the CEO called Ansa McAl’s description of the “very enthusiastic” response of BHL management to their bid “highly inaccurate”.

Mr. Cozier goes on to endorse the Neal & Massey deal as better for Banks Holdings than an Ansa McAl takeover.

 “The BS&T Neal and Massy Deale is better for BHL than a takeover of BS&T by Ansa McAl …” – Source: BHL Ad “BHL is NOT on board with Ansa McAL” – Daily Nation 26th July 2007 Pg 15

 

Now here is where we have a problem with this. In making this statement Mr. Cozier in effect endorses one of the three parties in the whole BS&T/Neal & Massy/Ansa McAl/local consortium  mess that this has become. Despite the rest of the text which goes on to effectively say that BHL can do what it needs to with the partners that it has now, Mr. Cozier has in effect taken sides.

It would have been far better to have stayed completely neutral in the whole mess.

Marginal

Advertisements

2 Comments »

  1. Disagree with you entirely. Head of ANSA basicly lied to the shareholders at their meeting this week, when he implied that Banks was on-board with their bid. Banks had to set the record straight. These Ansa guys are spinning the facts all over the place – makes you think World Cup cricket was still on.

    All I know is that if Ansa get their hands on Banks that’s the end of our Bajan beer. They did the same with Stag in Trinidad when that beer made major in-roads on Carib.

    Comment by Gimme a Banks — July 26, 2007 @ 7:52 pm | Reply

  2. Banks,

    I have no problem with Mr. Cozier setting the record straight. It is obvious that Ansa McAl was stretching the facts and he had a duty to correct that. To do so was right and proper.

    The problem I have was with him picking one of the proposers over another, as in saying that deal A is better for us than deal B. It provides a sanction for one of the three groups attempting to take over BS&T, which he should not have done.

    Hope this clarifies things somewhat.

    Marginal

    Comment by notesfromthemargin — July 26, 2007 @ 8:14 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: