Capricorn Energy is getting set for a showdown with one of its biggest shareholders over its proposed merger with Israel's NewMed Energy.
Edinburgh-based Capricorn has rejected plans by Pallister Capital to scrap the deal, which Pallister says undervalues the independent energy company. In an open letter to shareholders, Capricorn's board of directors said Pallister's financial analysis was based on "several outdated and incorrect facts and assumptions" that overstate the value of Capricorn on a stand-alone basis.
"We have real concerns that shareholders who rely on the plan [from Pallister], without understanding the material risks and errors in its analysis, will likely be voting for value destruction," Capricorn said.
READ MORE: Investor rebuffs Capricorn proposals
Pallister has a 6.6 per cent stake in Capricorn, making it the company's third-largest shareholder. Other investors have joined Pallister in opposing the deal with NewMed.
Pallister has called for a general meeting to vote on its proposals to remove seven Capricorn directors from their supervisory roles, including chief executive Simon Thomson. They would be replaced by six nominees from Pallister who would be expected to terminate the deal with NewMed.
Capricorn said it will issue a notice next week for that meeting to be held on February 1, with a vote on the NewMed deal to be "on or around" the same date.
READ MORE: Capricorn ditches Tullow merger for Israeli gas specialist NewMed
Detailing its version of the financial circumstances, Capricorn said the merger with NewMed would deliver up to $920 million in fair market value to shareholders versus $866m under Pallister's plans. Pallister rejected this claim, saying the board appeared intent on "talking down" Capricorn's prospects to justify the "flawed" NewMed deal.
Capricorn agreed the deal with NewMed at the end of September, scrapping a previously-proposed merger with Tullow Oil in the process.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here