Member Info for 15LIVES

FFC

£42 million from us plus £4.76 because I've just found some loose change in my overall pockets before throwing them into the washing machine after a week at work.

FFC

I've got every confidence that QIA are ready to step in.

I'm not sure exactly of the process but although votes have already been cast by some if AA withdraw their offer before Tuesday and put in a higher bid then surely we have to vote again.

Capslock

I certainly do think there shall be a funding package if there's a no vote. I think there's a damn good chance of AA increasing their offer before Tuesday too.

This is a tier one asset with II having bought at three and four times current share price. When they bought they did so because of a return on their investment which is as promising now as it was at the time of previous open offers. I don't care how little II are exposed to Sirius as a percentage of their overall portfolios or how small their losses would be for them if Sirius go bust. They bought for a future return which is still there and I don't believe they shall let that slip through their fingers for want of a bit of further investing.

Just my view and why I'm holding.

Capslock

No vote persuades QIA or another or combination there of to announce funding package to prevent administration.

Capslock

You could sell now or wait until Monday and sell then instead after AA raise their offer.

Wasbenlittle

Counting of votes is by Fraser in a locked room on his own with an abacus whilst AlanG hangs off a ladder outside banging on the window.

Their name that should have read and not there name.

Apologies for lousy spelling. It drives me mad when other posters do it so I have to correct myself.

Eggbasket

Thanks for reply.

Did a quick Google on Carillon and in April 2017 management wanted to go for a rights issue but Morgan Stanley wouldn't underwrite it.

Haven't googled ROK. There name still sends a shiver down my spine as I used to sub contract to them. They went bust owing a colleague of mine who's a sole trader and a tiler over thirty grand and a heating engineer I know over a hundred grand.

All the best.

I asked this question a while back but not sure if I got a reply with the volume of posts at the time:

Are there any companies that have gone to the wall requiring a cash injection to stay afloat and done so not tapping shareholders for required money?

Pwh31

Some of us are doing what we are doing because of greed you say!

Greed!

Are you having a laugh!

Neither is it denial. Of that I can assure you.

A no outcome has in my opinion, and many others voting no , a very good chance of pushing II into providing necessary funding.

Yorkshire bred

I'm not sure how the process works but when I registered my vote with my broker they said my intention would be passed on to Sirius (whatever that means).

Scott

I'm going to try to answer or give you an alternative viewpoint to your 10.48 post:

Because of the situation we are now in I've pledged more money as part of the fund Sirius campaign. However, had Fraser come to us Pis last year I would have not pledged as I was of the opinion back then required monies could be raised elsewhere. If such an attempt by Fraser had failed back then any negotiations with AA ( or indeed another interested party ) would have put him in an even more disadvantageous position when negotiating. Remember we were circa 3p before AA offer.

Trickydicky

Yes.

Really.

Trickydicky

Whether they are off takes or TorPs is irrelevant in the context of why i originally referred to them.

I just can't see a higher bid coming unless it's before 3rd March. If another party is eying us up now there's no way as I see it they are going to risk losing us to a yes vote for AA. Anything after a no vote won't be a takeover from another interested party but more a cash injection from one or more of our II to protect their holding. That's why I've voted no. Either another bidder is going to step out of the shadows at the last minute before next Tuesday or failing that and a no vote II helping us go back to the aim of our SR.

The quandary for me is whether ( providing the shares aren't suspended ) to sell next Monday if no other party has put in a rival bid (providing we're still above 5p) with the intention of buying back in on the back of a no vote and the inevitable collapse in share price which it shall precipitate.

Trickydicky

I'm fully aware of whether off takes are enforceable. That's not the purpose and context of why I referred to then. Dogstar posted that there was no independent verification for the efficacy of our product. My point, regardless of whether off takes are enforceable, is that others wouldn't be wanting our product if it's efficacy hadn't been proved.

Jiffybag

I agree with you on JPM. But I was referring merely about Fraser in my post.

Pwh31

It doesn't seem like a great Aussie stitch up to you because it's not.

The one single over riding question above all others which those who proclaim Fraser orchestrsted this whole affair can not give an explanation for, is why someone would deliberately force a a share down to such a lowly figure, resulting in a one off payment instead of said payment instead being paid on an annual basis in the form of a dividend for the next potential one hundred years. Not to mention the adulation and kudos that would be bestowed on him in keeping Sirius successfully independent.

Dodstar

Over thirteen million tonnes of off takes seems good enough verification for me.

Tex

I agree if it's a no vote an 'interloper' could well make themselves know, but if they do I think it shall most likely be one of our II providing funding to save their own skins after a failed and preferred yes vote. I can't see any party not invested here at the moment and looking to pounce waiting for a no vote is what I mean.