BHP lobbies Londoners

Press, 15 February 1986, Page 23

BHP lobbies Londoners

NZPA-AAP London Following hard on the heels of Mr Robert Holmes a Court, a BHP executive, Mr David Adam, this week walked the streets of London to court British shareholders away from the Bell Resources partial take-over offer.

Fifteen per cent of BHP stock was held by British investors — mainly corporate buyers such as insurance companies, financial institutions and pension funds — a year ago. Today, that British investment in BHP is a mere 5 per cent.

The BHP executive general manager (corporate affairs), Mr Adam admitted at a press conference that he suspected most of the shareholding had been lost to Bell Resources. However, he denied that his three-day public relations exercise was a “panic” rescue operation to retain the 5 per cent “We decided some time ago to make regular visits to our major overseas investors to keep them abreast on company developments,” he said. On February 4, Bell Resources’ offer was lifted to 20 per cent of the BHP

wealth, based on sAust7.7o (SNZ10.01) cash for each share. The BHP chairman, Sir James Balderstone, described the Bell offer in Melbourne on February 4 as “not a genuine bid,” “insincere,” “worthy of derision” and suggested that the Bell Resources chief, Mr Holmes a Court, had "some other motive.” It appeared today that BHP was still in the dark about Mr Holmes a Court’s real intentions. “Mr Holmes a Court would need to plunder BHP to recover his position afterwards,” Mr

Adam said. He said that Bell shareholders’ funds amounted to sAustBooM (SNZIO4OM). It had debts of sAustlß (SNZI.3B), he said and, to achieve a majority 38 per cent stake in BHP, would finish sAust3.sß ($NZ4.558) in debt. “I leave it to you to estimate how stable a company that would be,” Mr Adam said. “The size of the Bell offer is so small and the level of borrowing so large that the acquirer should state his intentions and how he would stabilise the finances of his vehicle. “We want full disclosure of Mr Holmes a Court’s plans, should he succeed in this bid. “As a shareholder and an Australian citizen, I question whether so much of Australia’s resources should be under the control of a single decisionmaker who has a record of short-term profit making and speculation.” Meanwhile, in Australia Mr Homes a Court will have to fully outline his plans for BHP before the National Companies andSecurities Commission registers his partial offer. The NCSC has requisitioned further information on “disclosure matters” in what analysts have described as a move to keep the market and, in particular, BHP shareholders, fully informed of Mr Holmes a Court’s plans for their company.