Revised TVS offer is worth an extra 8.5m pounds
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.International Family Entertainment, the US cable television group headed by the evangelist Pat Robertson, has succumbed to pressure from TVS preference shareholders and raised its offer to them.
As reported in the Independent yesterday, the cash element of the offer has been raised from 43p to 60p a share. Preference shareholders also get shares worth 63p a share while ordinary shareholders are being offered 23p in shares or 35p cash.
The new cash will add about pounds 8.5m to the total value of the IFE offer, making it worth between pounds 44.4m and pounds 56.5m, depending on how many investors take the cash alternatives.
The offer for the former ITV franchisee was raised after IFE was told by Sun Life that it would accept the offer at the new level for its holding of 5.07 million shares. Taken with acceptances already received, 79 per cent of ordinary shareholders and 52.8 per cent of preference shareholders have now pledged to take the offer.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments