Speakers from Touchstone Exploration, Shanta Gold, Savannah Resources and Kavango Resources feature in our Natural Resources webinar on May 25th. Please register here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Thanks ISA, your correct, I have the past customer turn out super low (20% past borrowers and 5% past guarantors of those who have a claim that I also have low) and as you explained this group swings the vote as they have the higher claims, this is why I have close figures, but I wanted to calculate for worse case. I’m confident the vote will be called in out favour, and it is interesting that in trying to be fair to all customers Amigo have created a situation where they can, in some way improve there chances by mobilising past customers with large balances to vote. Another group I completely dismissed is current customers that are owed a redress over their current balance and I’m sure Amigo are making it clear to this group they need to vote yes to get cash.
Youre not a million miles off my numbers but mine are a little more optimistic. What you'll see from your spreadsheet is how sensitive it is to so many factors. Turnout for past customers is the key here as I suspect they likely believe they have the largest claims. AMGO are getting those people mobilised, I'd be sure of it. If they know who has voted (or not), they know who to 'remind' with some pretty clear benefits to voting 'yes'. The hold below 18p isn't a coincidence... people are holding or waiting on the sidelines for some indication... a whiff of positivity and it blows through 18p... and, for balance, vice versa. Your numbers suggest it's a 50/50-ish (ok, simplistically) and I suspect the market feels not so dissimilar, which is why we're delicately balanced on an 18p knife edge, ready to move quickly! It's just a bit frustrating we didn't blow the previous 19.88p (I think) recent high because that seemed to indicate the market thinking there was a little more potential here, at this time. But I'd trade this week of stability for the volatility we had when we saw a meagre +10% or so from today!
Agreed the 1bn figure is madness, after further thought, its safe to just use the £85mil set off amount estimate that Amigo give (and add 30% to be safe), as if current customers have a claim above their current loan (covered by set off) they should vote YES as they would received something under the scheme, so estimating more than that only goes our way regardless. then I'm using an estimate from past claims and Dept Camel estimate of $4500~ per claim for all past claims (as they don't get set off). with these figures and the guesses that I made for who will make claims I make it worse case 61% vote YES and of the YES votes 79% of the total value of votes. Happy to share my workings out if anyone wants it, but not sure how to send excel on here.
the 1bn - 1.2bn figures you mention are a non starter.. thats why the scheme was put in place because the secured creditors would just pull the plug. Which would leave the unsecured creditors (customers) with sod all on the pound.. Amigo have tried to do their best by customers as evidenced with paying out initially, they could have just went into administration a while ago and started fresh?
KieH i cant remember the exact figures but its something like 186m already paid to people who got their letter before december 12th 2020.. 15m + upto another 20m (total 35m in the scheme) + 4 years of 15% of future pretax profits..
from garys estimates the 35m should cover 38.5p on the pound for redress and the 15% for 4 years would add to that considerably.. but it does ust depend how many valid claims come forward (no way to really know)
Whatever way you look at it, the split of the vote numbers (50%) seems like its in the bag, only current borrowers should vote NO (they all should). But it would be good to hear anyones thoughts on the average redress value for current customers and past customers, Dept Camel suggest £3400 for current and £5000 for past, this would (based on her own guess at the amount of claims) mean £1.2Billion in redress amount. Amigo have already said they see no relastic scenario of a redress above £1Billion, so these figures must be wrong somewhere. Any suggestions on how to predict the redress amount?
Looks really complex KieH, good luck with it.
I'd be interested to see an estimate.
Criteria 2 - 75% of the value of the claims of all creditors who vote
• Based on the figures above;
o Total Past Customers with a claim – 87,500
o Total Current Customers with a claim – 198,000
o Total Customers with a claim – 285,500
• Average redress amount according to forcescompare.com is £3,533, according to Dept Camel its £5,000, so let’s presume it’s in the middle £4,266.
• Average balance owed to Amigo is estimated at £3400 (gross loan book divided by the number of current customers).
• Current customers will have a lower-than-average claim than the past customers who have repaid the full balance. To simplify will can assume the current customers are owed the full amount of outstanding balance in redress (Dept Camels assumption), this is around 79% of the average redress claim.
• Of this we can make the presumption that once the current customers receive £3,400 per valid claim the remaining average redress amount can be split between the past customers @ £6,225.63, these figures may be a fair amount off, but we are using % in working out the weighted vote average, therefore we just need to have the ratio about correct.
If I can get some feedback, I'll get these numbers in a spreadsheet and share the results.....
Hi, Thanks for the vote comments ISA. the way I see it, its a complicated prediction on the 75% value side, but maybe someone can help out with the figures, who it more knowlagble than myself?:
• Current customers – 300,000
• Past Customers – 700,000
• # Outstanding Loans -137,000
• % Guarantors – At Least 50% based on 300,000 current customers and 137,000 outstanding loans
Criteria 1 - 50% of the people voting
• Only people who think they have a claim can vote.
• Most Guarantors will vote YES, they are highly likely to get nothing in administration, but may receive a redress via the scheme. Only guarantors who made payments can vote, so I’ll make a guess that 95% of those who vote/have a claim will vote YES.
• Not all Current borrowers will vote NO, however for the sake of argument we will presume 95% will vote NO, as most will not trust SchemeCo to uphold their claim.
• Most past customers will vote YES, In administration, there won’t be any cash refunds, only balance set-offs for people with current loans. Only people who would like to see Amigo go insolvent will vote NO (revenge vote), of these they are like to have smaller claims, or they would vote YES to have a chance to receive some compensation.
• Secured creditors do not have a vote in the Scheme
• Of the customers asked to vote current customers are more likely to vote than past.
• According to Dept Camel, a best guess is half to three-quarters of current customers have a claim – lets say 66%.
• Past Customers are harder to estimate, but it is a good guess that less past customers will attempt to claim, however they have nothing to lose in making a claim if voting yes. Dept Camel estimate 20% of past borrowers will make a claim. Of the 500,000 past loans, 50,000 guarantors made a payment, all of these will have a chance at a claim. So let’s presume 5% of past guarantors will vote (50% non-turn out of guarantors who have a vote).
A few other things to work into the calculations...
50% of the "customers" are guarantors.
Any guarantors who paid zero money to Amigo will have zero redress entitlement and therefore no vote
As I understand it guarantors who have paid anything would be due all their payments back but by definition have no balance (they are not borrowers). Those guarantors who can vote have zero financial benefit from a no vote.
I've no idea how many guarantors have had to make payments or how many will bother to vote, but I'm pretty sure 90% of those that do will vote yes.
Any current customers due redress will have been paying back on their loan for over 12 months at 49% apr. If they are due back all the interest they have paid plus 8% then they will likely clear more than half of their remaining balance. Except for the 8% they will be due this whether the vote is yes or no. Many will clear their balance completely either way.
However, there can only be a max of 150k people in this situation.
Absolute rot pal. Timmy predicts the SP will drop EVERY day...law of probabilities mate
Exactly this :) Had to coach the protege for a couple of hours so missed the closing fun and games. If the worst case REASONABLE scenario still results in the outcome you want, then you're in a very good place. My point is really that everyone should be aware that black swan events do have a real probability. Like him or loathe him, Timmy predicted the drift, which I agreed with... Long and the short of it... It'll go back up. Try not to get too worried about the daily or the intra-daily over the next few weeks. Some will make 10% quickly, others will lose... holders will be more than fine over the long term I BELIEVE. DYOR and all that. Right, drinking time. Merry Easter everyone. Some good, productive chat the last few days!
I’ve made valid contributions, also those contributions would have saved you nearly 15% if you would have listened to them.
I’ve followed this share right from it’s first drop, I know how volatile she can be.
Remember Amigo is not out of the woods yet, loads of time left until that deciding vote, and on top of that we all know the % percentages are going to be changed higher on the next court date.( years of pain)
Heard it all before Amigo is the messiah lol
Aye Inforanickel, I believe ISA thinks so as well, but was giving that as a gross approximation for a conservative estimate, to see how badly the vote could go, and demonstrated that even in that scenario, it would still probably be in our favour.
Saying that all of the 300k will vote no could be an overstatement, remember some people may have been happy to get the loan and although treated unfairly are still happy. Other situation that may change it is how many of these 300k are on debt camel and these sites, they may only hear about this from amigo and be happy they are making an effort to correct the situation and may not do so much research to see bile from the likes of debtcamel
Yet another thread very rich with productive discussion, nice one ISA!
With regards to what you're saying, those are some very conservative estimates, which I think do give us a very good idea of the conservative estimate, which still seems to be overwhelmingly positive.
Also, when you consider, of the claimants, there were only a huge number made upon the announcement of the scheme, and they only totalled about 12k at one point, so I imagine of the 300k current customers, if any are voting outright no, it'll be from those 12k current...
As for all the negativity in the social media, a few have alluded to it, but generally only the disgruntled will make noise. So whilst we're seeing tons of negativity thrown about the place, that's simply because people don't tend to feel a need to throw the positivity about as much. So we're very unlikely of getting much of a representation of the positive voters at all, let alone a proportional representation of those with that outlook.
I suppose only time will tell though...
Exactly... my best guess is that, of the 100k, actually a lot 'reappear'. However, it's a nice way of bringing some balance and pausing for thought on some of the negative/conservative aspects. Folk need to make their own judgement on how the vote will go but I wanted to 'dig into it' a little bit with the board to perhaps help people consider how '(un)important' the fear mongering on the likes of Debt Camel MAY be, numerically/arithmetically/probabilistically, to the outcome. The loudest people are the ones with the most recent, thus likely smallest redress, grievance. A no vote from one of those people is likely statistically negligible in terms of outcome. DYOR and all that. I don't want to wander into the ramp camp. Very good chance it drifts down on no news and low volume before getting all hot and bothered again.
Whilst the ~100k are uncontactable, they're hopefully not all dead and may also see the fanfare that starts to build with Adverts in papers, MSE on TV, other friends and family who may also have a loan and mention the claims etc. I'd bet my last pound that Amigo will do everything they can and probably prioritise if someone reaches out to them saying they used to have a loan, but havent heard anything or got a chance to vote etc. Thus, hopefully bringing some of those 100k back to the table (and as ISA mentioned, if they are uncontactable, they must be old customers with settled loans).
I don't think it matters, to be overly simplistic. However, you're right in that it is an unknown. Taking the 100k uncontactables (doesn't mean they don't know about the SOA) off the 700k is a conservative way of viewing "yes" voter turnout vs. 100% of "no" voter turnout. The reality is, they're probably all similarly motivated to either get their loan reduced and/or get "free cash". Statistically, you'll probably get similar turnouts in each camp. It's not a political question, it's a question of financial motivation and they're all being similarly motivated. Have less debt and/or have more cash.
But is that based on a 100% voter turn out?
Hi F, I think when I started typing that message much earlier this morning, it was in response (in agreement) to something you had said a few days ago and reiterated today. Lots of moving parts but when you consider what type of person has the most say, it's a "yes" person. When you consider that; Trust Pilot and Debt Camel are just noise, albeit an acknowledged as very scary noise. But, need to be balanced and say that stranger things have happened and perhaps political pressure could (not would) force the FOS the other way. Balance of probabilities for me (literally calculated) as it stands today... "Yes" is the winner by a surprising margin and 85% is my P50. For a bit of a deramp though, don't want to be too positive... new tax year isn't for a few days so hopefully 10p before top up (KIDDING ;)!
It’s difficult to see the SOA not going ahead but to assume makes an ASS out of U and ME. Positive outcome makes us a great deal more investable. New and astute BOD, clean slate, court approval, customer perception enhanced and guarantors more comfortable adding name to loan!
Pretty much as I suggested ISA - its virtually rigged in Amigos favour - by the way the existing customers 300,000 aren't all complaining for what its worth and the the ones that are get cash on top of balance redress as opposed to just redress. I agree they will contain most no's in this population. As i said, past customers paid the most and therefore have the heaviest weighted vote. Fewer will bother to vote, but each one of theirs is worth substantially more than existing complainants. And the FOS has a massive say and will make up a few percentage points of the yes vote. love it.
Agreed ISA - personally I think their vote reduces the risk massively
Right! And this is another of the unknowns... I don't think we know yet their weight. BUT, I think it will be large. Their effective redress of £10M is large. I also expect them to strongly vote yes to 'clear the problem' off their books and get rid of their largest source of backlog clogging their systems (see the boss resigning last month). Yes makes their lives so much easier, which is why I suspect the FCA didn't oppose (effectively).