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.
LOL
Who is 'noone'?
You n I 'cared' thats why. Others misled. Badly.
Yes I was one warning not to buy - and got shot down in flames by the brokers and banks of keyboard bashers in the city desperate to make their easiest cash ever.
They vanished. Funny that.
Trust noone.
One of my earlier posts. If you choose to read one thing, follow the link at the bottom. My good friend is a genius but makes it look so simple:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEBRE: Debenhams passes Stress Test6 Dec '18
Stress tests are easy to pass if they make assumptions that ensure they pass. Sounds obvious but I've seen these "stress tests" in action and always weary when management make comments like this. I guess what else are they going to say? We failed the stress test and need to recapitalise?!
For them to "pass" a 3 year stress test, that will take them past refinancing of their bonds in July 2021. So one can make the view that DEB have made the "assumption" they will have no issues refinancing their publicly traded bonds (currently trading on a yield to maturity of 20% and at 65p in the pound).
For DEB to make the assumption they can refinance the bonds, they will probably have assumed they will restore profitability margins, reduce rents and not be subject to any break costs they hadn't thought of. They probably would have assumed they could stretch the creditor days aswell. Cutting the dividend helped restore some cashflow, but if the business continues to erode, this is only a short term measure. Transformations rarely fulfill their promised cost cuts and often go over budget due to unforeseen complexities - luckily DEB is a simple business so may be ok on this one?
It's a sad story and bloody big hole to get out of.
As I mentioned on one of my earlier posts, I'm a kiwi a member on other sites in NZ / AUS. I remember one great post on one of the sites regarding buying into a downtrend by an esteemed contributor. Have a look at the attached link and maybe consider this as a lesson before buying more shares in DEB - it's a high risk proposition.
https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?8469-Buying-in-a-Downtrend
I almost find it insulting how ignorant these comments are.
How did this happen? Read my posts from start to finish and I explained everything over 4 months ago. Everything. Exactly how this would play out. And guess what, it happened. Stop blaming other people. My very first post against DEB's was swiftly attacked by AppleGarth accusing me of a being a manipulator on behalf of a large shareholder. Disgusting.
Do you think the share price decreased 95% because it was a good company and it was "going to recover"? I said a while back that 90% of people on this forum were not qualified to invest and I think that was probably a tad light.
Applegarth
You appear to be the only person in the country that thinks there was a deadline that moved from 8th April to 22nd April. You've been told before, they were two entirely different deadlines, one imposed on MA by the takeover code, the other imposed on MA by Debs creditors.
Sorry to those that took a loss on this but it was clear well in advance that the odds of MA bidding were very small and this was highlighted here plenty of times.
Debenhams (LON:DEB) (in administration)
On a related note, I didn't realise how much money Mike Ashley had ploughed into Debenhams shares - £150 million! If he can get it so badly wrong, that seems like a good reminder of just how difficult it is to get it right in this arena. And also a reminder that equity is a very dangerous asset class.
The lenders who have taken control of Debenhams are said to include a couple of banks, along with the distressed debt investors GoldenTree and Silver Point.
They are the only ones who might be able to come out of this process with a win, and they took on much less risk than Mike Ashley did with his purchase of the ordinary shares in the open market. I'm sure they did a full scenario analysis and figured out that even in a worst-case scenario, the losses wouldn't be too awful.
As a general principle, it's far safer to buy the distressed debt of a struggling retailer, rather than its equity.
Ashley's strategy looks more like dangerous, risk-seeking behaviour than it does a sober investment programme. Hopefully he can avoid falling into the same trap in future!
I recommend the movie 'The Big Short'. Not just because its a terrific movie, but because it explains how shorting works. I won't spoil it, but in this instance a hedge fund predicted the sub prime mortgage crisis a decade ago, and shorted against.
Note, they didn't cause the subprime mortgage crisis, it would have happened any way.
It would be a strange system whereby the market has been de-regulated so that Man On the Street is allowed to take part, but everyone (including hedge funds) is only allowed to go long on shares, even if they are in decline. Our pensions would be in a complete mess for starters.
I had 13k invested here. It was a somewhat of a calculated punt as I'm selling my house at the momentum and would have had to pay the gains tax to the revenue however I can write this loss of against that bill and recover some of my losses. I'm not based in the UK and I don't know if others can write their loss off against their tax bill. It was a learning experience for me and genuinely feel very bad for those that lost investments here...
" Shorting causes bad cash flow . Shorting has one purpose to lowerthe SP . The sharesare loaned out to sell in to the market and lowerthe SP . That simple , then funding giving many more shares than had it not been shorted then repeat before it can recover hence even more sharesfor the same money . The whole U.K. market is being slaughtered by shorting and the dilution it brings with it "
Ironic
I get your thinking....but...funding ..is ..taking a risk ...the lender takes a risk.....now ..the shorter is trying to suggest to the market what that risk is.. by selling shares because the shorter thinks the shares are over valued
The lender then pays a lower price for the new shares to match what is perceived in the market as the risk ..the SP
Of course the Longs can buy the SP to counter the shorters...cant they? ..why dont they?
'Shorting causes bad cash flow' - how does someone borrowing and selling shares cause cash flow problems?
More likely the shorters have an insight that suggests to them that a share is overvalued and then they try and take advantage of the weakness that they have perceived. They profit if correct of lose if wrong; it is just a part of an efficient market.
Shorting causes bad cash flow . Shorting has one purpose to lowerthe SP . The sharesare loaned out to sell in to the market and lowerthe SP . That simple , then funding giving many more shares than had it not been shorted then repeat before it can recover hence even more sharesfor the same money . The whole U.K. market is being slaughtered by shorting and the dilution it brings with it . Boy did that get a bite . Don’t stop the dilution , it makes people afortune ok it’s breaking the country but it rewards the market .
Agreed. Have not been following Debenhams to much, however, in this case seemed to of been a shocking lack of principles, and bad cash flow.
Just want to say my heart goes out to those who have been affected in the last week. I lost money as part of the Afren collapse, however have work hard to almost make my losses back. That’s trading.
Private Equity caused the problems - once they have chewed the meat of the bones there is normally little but gristle and bare bones left. Caveat Emptor - always wonder why the 'financial whizz kids' want to sell you something after they have done feeding on the corpse, even if it takes time to decay. From a 2018 Independent article:
Debenhams' problems can be traced back to a deal to take the company private in 2003 when a consortium of private equity houses led by chief executive Rob Templeman and made up of Texas Pacific Group, CVC and Merrill Lynch Private Equity bought the company.
I am sure many can list other companies that have failed or suffered under similar circumstances.
Are you clinically insane? If you think that shorting caused Debenhams to go into administration you may need some kind of psychological help. And I say that as no joke.
Was it a string of bad Directors with un-realistic wages . Or was it ...the market using shorting to keep movement to create buys and sells and extra profit from the spread all leading to dilution on fundings and extra dilution on the next funding . The lower the market forced the SP with shorting the more dilution for exactly the same funds . What a vicious downward spiral the Market Makers and their Shorters create . Who sot DEBs who sot FLYB who made Lions gold and a FRR run away ? . Who can survive the markets deliberate dilution ?
I don't normally post here but have been following this share for a while and invested about a week ago on speculations of MA offer.
I have been reading about SPF posts, Does anyone know if he/she is ok - any update at all?
Thanks.
We've been at odds once or twice Pearls, but I'd like to echo your appreciation and extend my consolations about the loss. Time and distance soften these disappointments and a new perspective is obtained. Good luck with any future investments.
Atb
Terrible outcome but I have really appreciated all the comments and banter even if I did not agree with some commentators. This has cost me a small fortune - I had over 600,000 shares [which were not bought at 1.83p]! I understand the situation more fully now, but it does seem to me that we were misled, lied to, treated poorly and so on; but we seem to be powerless.
I'll come back onto this board if MA does indeed take legal action and if there is any chance of reversal of the prepack but I'm not hopeful.
I wish you all the best.
Sorry Apple but we’ve tried to explain it to you, but you just keep posting the same thing. Good luck in your outrage
reposted -
Takeover Code Rule 21(1)
21.1 WHEN SHAREHOLDERS’ CONSENT IS REQUIRED
(a) During the course of an offer, or even before the date of the offer if
the board of the offeree company has reason to believe that a bona fide
offer might be imminent, the board must not, without the approval of the
shareholders in general meeting, take any action which may result in
any offer or bona fide possible offer being frustrated or in shareholders
being denied the opportunity to decide on its merits, or:
(i) issue any shares or transfer or sell, or agree to transfer or sell,
any shares out of treasury or effect any redemption or purchase by
the company of its own shares;
(ii) issue or grant options in respect of any unissued shares;
(iii) create or issue, or permit the creation or issue of, any securities
carrying rights of conversion into or subscription for shares;
(iv) sell, dispose of or acquire, or agree to sell, dispose of or
acquire, assets of a material amount; or
(v) enter into contracts otherwise than in the ordinary courseof
business.
(b) The Panel must be consulted in advance if there is any doubt as to
whether any proposed action may fall within Rule 21.1(a).
...
http://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/code.pdf?v=1Apr2019
The deadline of 8th April was moved to April22nd...this new deadline was the sting as MA was (possibly) going to bid again. They moved against the rules of article 2.8 that prevents any company going into administration while offers are on the table. MA, like us was 'fooled' into believing we had until April22nd for him or others to make further bids. Believing we had a new deadline, who knows what bid or deal MA may have come up with. Moving the goalposts is NOT cricket.............
IF the LAW COURTS don't see through this scam, which was obviously predetermined for a quick sale in administration, immediately his offer was refused......then f/uc k British law. NOW I KNOW why bad court decisions are taken to Strasburg?
Rule 2.8 mergers and takeovers says that while formal or hostile bids are ongoing they cannot go into administration. Neither can they sell to a third party without a formal bid be made and SH approval, Also when a deadline has been notified to shareholders (ie extension to April 22nd) this deadline must be kept if a bid is refused and for the purpose of another bid or bids be made.
This BOD have broken every rule in the book, drawing in investors under the premise of setting a new deadline, then reneging on it and furthermore, the new deadline of April 22nd was issued in the RNS yesterday. They also conspired to get a 200m loan for the sole purpose for the lenders to take control and prevent any further bids from being executed
MA should take this to every high court in the land even in the US and get full compensation for SD and SH's
Has legal action been taken?!
he laughed at?!
Not even just the code but the mention of the time MA had to make a bid should be enough. I remember Tesco giving out compensation a few years ago because an RNS had mislead investors.
If the RNS was misleading then the company should pay compensation and that debt must rank pari passu with the other debt holders shouldn't it?