The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring financial educator and author Jared Dillian has been released. Listen 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. 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.
big story in the mail today that Mike ashley has launched
a last minute legal challange to restructuring plans at Debenhams..
debenhams confirmed that it had received applications from parties
including sport direct to challenge the CVA which was approved last month
the opposition came at the 11th hour just before the 28 day challenge period
close on Monday
terry duddy executive chairman at debenhams said
we believe the challenges to the CVA to be without merit
and will vigorously defend them
PEARLS ''' look like your wish could come true you hold on in there..
well done MA '' way to go look like you have rattled there cage
and all genuine shareholders that has lost money in this debacle
is 100% behind you
GLA that's locked in and still have hope of something back
i don't know how some posters on here can gloat at other investors
losses because they sold out … to me that's the lowest of the low
Just shows you how a CVA can be successfully concluded with the landlords after all! Why on earth was this not properly pursued by DEB's BOD? MA needs to sort this out as part of his lawsuit and get the drains up. Bondholders were too easily allowed to take over the company - why was so little effort put in on behalf of shareholders?
Insane thinking.... Pearls, Colds, knigee... 3 teenage spacecadets who can't take responsibility for their own actions
Best of luck hope you get your money back
Good post Pearls
Same for me
Also feel if he can reverse it then chance of re-list possibly?
Who knows, will have to wait and see. Would do wonders for his personal reputation that's for sure..
Look, I appreciate that I am pretty clearly clutching at straws on this, but I lost a packet on here, and frankly MA is our only hope now.
I note as well that MA keeps his cards close to his chest, so whether or not there is any glimmer of hope for shareholders needs to still be assessed. Since I cannot view the lawsuit, it is impossible to see the full nature of the allegations against the administrator. But given that MA was a 30% shareholder, I cannot see him taking this action just for the sake of £500,000 he was owed - the court case will cost multiples of that. Logically then he must be pursuing some sort of payback eventually for shareholders so I fully back him.
I wonder if moves for a class action got anywhere - I did not see this being advertised, although it was discussed on here for a while. Thee is also the carrot of the changing legal environment following recent cases at the Supreme Court so I would guess there is still some balls in the air.
He should take own advice:
"All I will say is that it's not advisable to make promises because 9/10 times you will break it in a BB thread that has your interest. Although there is one thread on LSE were I promised not to post on this year and so far have managed it."
What a hypocrite! And a bully boy to boot.
Wow, great post, so good we get to see it three times!
The fella has no self restraint! Couldn't even go a day the poor soul.
Welcome back Knigelk, good to hear from you
HK noted. I've no issues with the man, I wish him the best.
The only guy with an ego is the poster who never held here long or short but continues to post in a delisted share. It doesn't bother me if MA takes legal action or not - as I kept saying, people were trading the share based on an ultra low share price (remember it doubled in a day) and the fact SPD were mulling over a bid. It's worse because the company continues while shareholders were wiped out. Btw I presume you agree the shorters were gamblers too? They were taking the same risk - actually a bigger risk because I believe their losses can be unlimited. We don't need anyone telling us what to do with our money but if anyone ONLY invested in this share and nowhere else, I agree, that's gambling.
Now stop the digs or expect the report button to be used
regularly thanks....
The only guy with an ego is the poster who never held here long or short but continues to post in a delisted share. It doesn't bother me if MA takes legal action or not - as I kept saying, people were trading the share based on an ultra low share price (remember it doubled in a day) and the fact SPD were mulling over a bid. It's worse because the company continues while shareholders were wiped out. Btw I presume you agree the shorters were gamblers too? They were taking the same risk - actually a bigger risk because I believe their losses can be unlimited. We don't need anyone telling us what to do with our money but if anyone ONLY invested in this share and nowhere else, I agree, that's gambling.
Now stop the digs or expect the report button to be used
regularly thanks....
The only guy with an ego is the poster who never held here long or short but continues to post in a delisted share. It doesn't bother me if MA takes legal action or not - as I kept saying, people were trading the share based on an ultra low share price (remember it doubled in a day) and the fact SPD were mulling over a bid. It's worse because the company continues while shareholders were wiped out. Btw I presume you agree the shorters were gamblers too? They were taking the same risk - actually a bigger risk because I believe their losses can be unlimited. We don't need anyone telling us what to do with our money but if anyone ONLY invested in this share and nowhere else, I agree, that's gambling.
Now stop the digs or expect the report button to be used
regularly thanks....
Met - spot on. He's trying to look for a pressure point - as in sell to me at a price I like and I'll drop the legal action. If this is the best he has come up with, forget it. Response to his action is without question strong and uncompromising. He won't be doing Pearly and Co any favours unfortunately!
Ifionlynew - you seem to have some real issues with pearl, take it easy dude.
Peals I’m afraid the legal action is against the cva procedure and not the suspension of the shares, sorry to say it but I don’t see any value in equity for us as SH. Just accept it we made a bad investment decision mate
Having read the article and with no mention whatsoever of shareholders...... it appears that SPD are coming at this from the point of view of them as creditors (apparantly owed 500k by Debenhams) *NOT* as shareholders!
They are objecting to the CVA, are they not? And is this a CVA that took place *before* or *after* liquidation of the Old Debenhams into Newco? It reads to me as being as after.
By the by. There is nothing whatsoever in this article that suggests that shareholders are going to get anything here.
Hey Pearls - robbed? Sure there was no equity.... Did they steal your zero...
Come on Knigeee... Feel free to go back on your word.... Its time to celebrate.... according to Pearly longs are getting reimbursed
Ah Pearls welcome back outta your depression. I would honestly like to see you get something back. If you do I would more than happy to match it and eat some humble pie!
Game on, I see. Well done Mr Ashley, let's now see what unfolds on this - I think bondholders will now have to eventually amend the deal to include a small amount for shareholders. We were robbed quite openly by the BOD without any consideration.
Time for a court to see sense and rule in our favour, especially with the other big Supreme Court action coming, as mentioned before on here.
It does seem odd that there are still those posting on here with an axe to grind over any payback to shareholders.
Quite so, vanity, nothing more.
As for dear Nigel, he says he won't be posting again. It must be killing him to see that this thread continues, but that he has imposed silence upon himself.
As welcome as this is, I have a feeling we have not heard the last from him. Such a sad case I am sure won't be able to help himself not to post again.
We shall see.
No not interesting in the slightest... Its called leading with your ego
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jun/11/mike-ashley-starts-legal-challenge-to-debenhams-rescue-plan
Interesting..
https://www.hl.co.uk/feeds/apps/newsroom-article?id=14933864
So you've a fortune now K. I think you're ego is giving you away. Nice to hear your not posting again.