Bell Group urges QPL meeting

Press, 13 January 1987, Page 27

Bell Group urges QPL meeting

NZPA-AAP Brisbane Bell Group, Ltd, has requisitioned an extraordinary meeting of takeover target, Queensland Press, Ltd, shareholders, QPL directors said in a statement.

The directors said QPL is considering the matter. QPL released a letter from Bell Group solicitors which said the meeting is called “to ensure that the directors do not attempt to dispose of: the major asset of QPL (its 24 per cent stake in the Herald and Weekly Times, Ltd) without the benefit of the view of the shareholders collectively.”

HWT in turn controls 49 per cent of QPL. Earlier, the Queensland Supreme Court adjourned the hearing of a bid by Bell Group associate, JN Taylor Holdings, Ltd, to prevent QPL accepting a take-over offer from News Corp, Ltd, or its associates.

The case will resume tomorrow.

Mr Justice Ryan said he

also extended until then an injunction granted on Friday preventing QPL accepting a sAust23 a share offer from News Corp which is also bidding sAustls a share for HWT. HWT directors have recommended acceptance, conditional on no higher bid being made. News Corp’s bids are higher than Bell Group’s $13.50 a share offer for HWT and John Fairfax, Ltd’s $2O a share for QPL. The offer for QPL, however, was conditional on acceptance by last Friday. News Corp’s chief executive, Mr Rupert Murdoch, was yesterday quoted in the company’s national newspaper, “The Australian,” as saying the bid — made through Cruden Investments — “has gone away,” but he added the company is confident of gaining control of its major target, HWT.

The solicitors’ letter to QPL said the meeting would also ensure shareholders and QPL directors have sufficient time to consider their positions

and recommendations. “Our clients are aware that the directors have before them competing offers for those shares. At the present time it is quite possible that those offers may be varied and, indeed, that other offers may be made as the offers presently before the directors must remain open for 28 days,” the letter said.

“No doubt you will obtain advice; but it seems to our clients that the directors have everything to gain and nothing to lose by facilitating an extrard' -al r atin

ordinary general meeting and taking the views of the shareholders collectively.

“Our clients, by this, are not arguing for the holding of the meeting. The meeting has been requisitioned validly and must, of course, be held. “However, the timing of the meeting is to some extent to be determined by the directors; and our clients request that you ensure that the meeting is called promptly.”