Member Info for Bfdinvestor

I'd say about £30m market cap is about right until next results come out

Good to see another green box hero running to the defence.

Just the usual nonsense to drown out anything that doesn't fit the troll agenda I guess

Sorry I said flotation instead of DMS

But the point still stands.

Go check the RNS, they can run phase 1 for a lot longer than 4 years if they choose to do so.

Plus, we don't yet fully understand the actual costs, so you don't know what spod price is required to get pay back

They fully understand that they have suitable ore to extend the life of the flotation plant.

It's called a debate Joebloggs, it's the purpose of these boards, if you don't want a debate think a little more carefully about what you post

Roger do you even begin to understand the corporate structure here.

The MG have zero stake in Kodal, so why would they care how many shares Suay Chin hold

Kod also have no direct stake in the mining company, which is owned by KMUK, so how could they be punished by MG

Look forward to the response lol

Go and read a few RNS and company presentations

Phase one can run for a lot longer than four years of they want it to.

The mine will run for many years and spod will be a lot higher priced

Why would anything you say upset anybody

Still, if you want to keep embarrassing yourself be my guest.

I see another green box has arrived. Seems it isn't only buses come in threes.

Although buses are useful

Amazing how the pack mentality always comes to the fore with the trolls.

Almost as if they were the same person

And still with the Tradey fantasy, so sad

Anyway CWWX you have embarrassed yourself enough for one morning.

I think most people appreciate Razor posting, it's a bit sad you need to try to mock someone who is trying to provide helpful information

The only person you succeed in embarrassing is yourself

Not on this thread there isn't

Absolute idiot.

Oh I think you have just beaten it hands down

Why even copy part of a post that is directly below yours

There is only one person you are making look an idiot and that is yourself

So it looks like they are now quoting the correct profit figure rather than turnover and there has been a nice bit of growth

No it wasn't CWWX

As I posted I checked on Telegraph.co.uk numerous times.

It wasn't in the business section. It wasn't in the retail section. The article about the two whingeing suppliers was still there though.

There are plenty of lies told on here, usually by the trolls, not by me

Did you not actually read the last Telegraph article CWWX. The one that claimed criminality, then rowed back from it and then miraculously within a day couldn't be found in the business or retail section of telegraph.co.uk, despite previous articles still being presented.

There were multiple errors in that article, why would this one be any different?

Mentioned at time when articles of association change was pointed out here that one of the alterations literally refers to administration scenario.

It actually refers to about 10 different scenarios if not more, as it is a cover all clause. So admin would always be included as a potential scenario.

Fed there is already a charge registered under the old RCF with Nat West as lead lender.

Until a new replacement charge appears we won't know what has been done.

But, as posted earlier, in case of admin shareholders become unsecured creditors anyway

Simon you basically don't understand company law.

Once a company goes into admin shareholders lose any rights they have as the administrators have total responsibility for the company.

The Telegraph has basically read the change in AoA wrong or more likely not read it at all and taken it's "news" directly from Ashley

I'd be intrigued to know what "trick" Kamani played in Debenhams the first time round, given he wasn't involved in the business prior to administration and the administrators will have gone with the best financial outcome post administration as that is what they legally have to do.

How could it ever have had revenue of 42m when the total GST revenue is a fraction of that?

Kachrafilter the one thing we can be certain about Ashley is that the only person he ever seeks to benefit is himself.

The fact that all he included in the open letter was the interest rate and amount of money implies to me that there would be other conditions. It will be interesting to see if Debs responds. It may or may not ever have been a serious offer.

Wrt the Telegraph, they are Ashley's poodle imo. Just look at the last article. It was first published stating criminality, which they rowed back from within a matter of hours and then within a day it was nowhere to be found in either the business or retail section of Telegraph.co.uk. That is how accurate the Telegraph is. Have you read the amended AoA, there is absolutely no way it can refer to Frasers shares in Debs

Kach - the terms on the agreement for the new credit agreement could rely on the company taping shareholders to split the risk... We will find out on results... Much like revb.

Surely that would be price sensitive information and would have to be communicated immediately

Thanks for posting Kachrafilter

A couple of points to pick up in what will doubtless be another shouting storm of negativity

1. The amount offered was £125m, Frasers may well have known that this would be unacceptable to Boo

2. The interest rate is lower but we don't know what other conditions came with the offer. We do know that when Frasers have offered loans in the past there have been conditions. It's interesting to note the mention of synergies, I'd assume that relates to Frasers Pay as an example.

3. From my reading of the change to the AoA, I don't think the assertion made about Frasers shares in Debs is correct. It refers specifically to existing shares which may have a charge over them or are owned by the specific institution. So this can't apply to Frasers. It seems more of a transparency and facilitation clause to me, rather than any risk to Frasers. But then again the article is in the poodle publication.

I doubt if we will see any response from Debs prior to results sadly