Firering Strategic Minerals: From explorer to producer. Watch the video 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.
It's called laying the ground on which to base your legal arguments. This case will take months, maybe years. Building the case, check all the relevant case law and precedents, testing evidence, all will take time. Then there's the FCA who could delay things with their own case. Given the animosity this will then probably require a lengthy trial. Of course costs will likely go to the winner, however MA might decide the risk of loosing and having to pay both sides costs does not warrant the possible gain times the chance of winning. That said, if this does go to court the press will be all over it and MA has never been shy of publicity.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6923855/Monsoon-Accessorize-owner-close-dozens-stores.html
CVA + store closures.
Has anybody knowledge as whether or not MA is applying / pursuing a reversal or was it hot air at the time?
Yeah, I mean IF what you said is true (and not just some huge conspiracy theory), why would you ever buy individual shares in any company? Why wouldn't you just buy the index, or better yet, buy a basket of bank stocks?!
Why do so many people want to participate in a system that they think is either fraudulent or rigged?
What's fraudulent is the banks having changed from how they caused the 2008/09 crisis - they are still telling one set of clients erroneous information about the most likely trajectory of the economy which facilitates arranging bets by these clients against other clients who they are giving the more accurate information to - information based on better policy knowledge and more high-quality assessments of the most likely future economic trajectory in the UK. That amounts to fraud in my book - when a bank doesn't give all clients access to the best information that is has.
The fact bankers never looked into how Debenhams got saddled with 20 years of upwards only rent revisions on commercial UK property, whilst in reality the global financial crisis was designed (or did without design) to bring about a fall in commercial property values around the globe - as it happened the UK was one of the worst countries hit with a 40% fall in the value of commercial property in 2008/09.
So what was fraudulent was the bankers allowing one part of their business to lock clients into 20 years of upwards only rent increases whilst another part of the bank was betting money that commercial property values would fall (and this was how that part of the bank would make their money).
The fact bankers never looked into how Debenhams got saddled with 20 years of upwards only rent revisions on commercial UK property, whilst in reality the global financial crisis was designed (or did without design) to bring about a fall in commercial property values around the globe - as it happened the UK was one of the worst countries hit with a 40% fall in the value of commercial property in 2008/09.
So what was fraudulent was the bankers allowing one part of their business to lock clients into 20 years of upwards only rent increases whilst another part of the bank was betting money that commercial property values would fall (and this was how that part of the bank would make their money).
Sorry, can someone please explain what was fraudulent?
You can try the FCA, but I doubt any of the authorities will do anything, otherwise this would not have been allowed to happen as it did, the bod have clearly failed in their duties and shareholders have been lied too, no one is standing up for the small people and even the media is not reporting it properly. Also the role MA played seems very suspect to me.
The Germans wanted to buy and or Partner up with the London Stock exchange, but once they took a closer look they ran for the hills and wanted nothing to do with them when they discovers the scale of failings and fraud.
Also what happened to those very expensive advisors appointed to safe the company.
@SafeYields you asked about how to buy the debt.
It's in tranches of £100,000 and there after increments of £1000
WiseAlpha sometimes have fractions available, you hold their notes, not the debt notes, in lots of £100
https://www.wisealpha.com/loan/detail/56/debln
If you can pick any up on WA, yield is 12%, yield to maturiry 50%
If it all works out you can double your money and get 12% a year income.
Not without risk.
Bucher to step down. Could not make it up!
This financial loss to shareholders needs to be investigated by the authorities and any wrongdoing punished severely otherwise this type of fraud will continue.
Less than 12 months ago Debenhams shareholders were told they had financial support from bankers and lenders to last them until 2020.
It appears that the directors deliberately loaded the company up with expensive debt with the purpose to steal the companies assets from the shareholders and frustrate the advances of Mile Ashley.
Seems like they acted illegally and fraudulently.
Has anybody on here made a complaint to the regulatory authorities or know how to do this ?
Ignore the recent rise. Check BIDSTACK out. https://www.valuethemarkets.com/2019/04/12/we-aim-to-become-the-biggest-video-game-advertising-media-owner-in-the-world-bidstacks-ceo-james-draper-discusses-his-firms-once-in-a-lifetime-op/
Sorry to hear you lost.
I still say if you take 10% - it is better than accepting nothing... no? £100K loss or £10K salvaged to reinvest in another growth company for example to get your position back.
Sorry if you did not sell out months ago - or indeed did not heed the warnings in black and white. A company does not warn like that if it is not going to happen. Seen it many many times before.
Those who kept saying buy buy buy this is only going one way - really did fleece the innocent, naïve and vulnerable.
I for one, and Daniel and a few others did warn ALL to not buy what they could not afford to LOSE.
Enjoy your weekends.
Family, friends and enjoying the hot sunshine all more important than dwelling on financial losses.
GLA.
. especially given the legal implications resulting from MAs stated intention to see the pre pack reversed. With regard to what I think MAs next move will be, given the complexity of the case I don't see anything happening soon, but I might be wrong.
Dude, game theory is all well and good, but if your inputs are wrong, it's just a garbage-in-garbage-out exercise.
Go on then, enlighten me. How did you reach your probabilities?
LongerShorter, that's a funny post, you almost had me for a second.
Somehow I seem to have entered a parallel universe where python can estimate the probability of outcomes with complete success! Fancy that?! I mean, that never even made the news!
If you really understand the stakeholders, the debt conditions, the cash flow generation, the leverage, the timing etc. you would understand that the probabilities are far more weighted towards a 0 (or close to 0), and the probability for the share rebounding to 30p on its own? 5%? Am I really supposed to take that seriously?
Don't waste anyone's time with that rubbish.
It’s just an attempt to reassure SD shareholders, because wider market knows Mike Ashley has thugged his fellow investors, thug word will have new connotations, & will elaborate and associate to insider traders and will stretch to Mike Ashley
The mans a joke.. he is deluded... he has some kind of ego thing to make him look like Father Christmas .. talking about why he is NOT like Debs to shareholders. He has LOST £150 million of his and SD capital and the only reason for the buyback was to hoodwink the faithful and support SD share price to overlook the fact that the balance sheet now has a sizeable black hole where DEBS used to reside
“If you want an advertisement for a banana republic stock market then this is it. The regulator can sit back and do nothing, but if they do then it will only encourage more and more abuse and before you know it London's reputation will be in tatters.”
Spot on. Could have not say it better.
“there was.... 10% better than 0p - no?”
Well, after losing 90% on a share, i’d rather see the company collapse and lose all, then salvage 10% and run the risk of a reversal. Imagine how it would feel to sell after a 90% loss and then see the company being saved and the share going back up after you sold at the bottom. A 100% wipeout is much easier to digest. At least you are not the only one who lost.
"Buying a share gives you voting rights,"
Usually the case, but the Debenhams BoD did everything in their power to stop this. Ashley called a shareholder meeting and before he was allowed to have it the rushed the company into administration. And what about a shareholder vote on refinancing, no that never happened either. Basically shareholders were given f all say. As I say, cannon fodder to be slaughtered for the bondholders benefit. If you want an advertisement for a banana republic stock market then this is it. The regulator can sit back and do nothing, but if they do then it will only encourage more and more abuse and before you know it London's reputation will be in tatters.
there was.... 10% better than 0p - no?
too l8