Member Info for Bfdinvestor

What confuses me is that if the fantasist idiot thinks these boards are a great source of information, why does he continually get things so wrong

And why does he pollute other boards where he has no investment if he wants these boards to be civil

Just hypocritical twaddle

Could well be, sorry may have missed it, what do you mean by US investment?

Tpg, sorry should have been clearer

I think revb may be part of a bigger picture kachrafilter

US investment, revb and bricks and mortar

Could be totally wrong

Have a look at the chef's posting history

He simply follows me from board to board like a bad smell

He has no shares anywhere imo and even less value to add

I can't see that at all kachrafilter

I can see both sets of results possibly being announced at the same time with with an equity driven takeover

MT it would certainly suggest something like TPG coming on board.

But it seems a very complex area in terms of subsidiaries and holding companies.

It may hgelp explain why things are taking so long I guess

Kachrafilter the link you have posted is to the UK holding company, which is a private company, not to the Jersey based PLC.

Check the list of directors, it isn't the PLC board.

I dont know if the PLC articles have changed, they wont be on Companies House

They didn't, they are still directors of the PLC

Some of us are trying to have a sensible debate southcoast if you have nothing to add atleast have the manners not to try to disrupt it

Mt that's interesting thanks.

They are all private companies as well.

I don't think it would relate to the RCF lenders as they have a floating charge already and taking shares would be irrelevant for them, they are far more likely to take a charge over a fixed asset.

The amended clause refers specifically to shares.

I don't know if PLC shareholders would have to vote on a transfer of shares in a wholly owned subsidiary, that is way beyond my legal knowledge.

MT this is a private company wholly owned by BOOHOO PLC registered in Jersey. Frasers don't hold any shares in it. Frasers shares are in the PLC.

This clause seems to relate to transparency around share transfer. I guess the question is why do you need transparency unless you are planning on releasing or transferring shares.

It could therefore support the theory of the US institution coming on board

Cheers kachrafilter

I've had a quick read and it seems to be a change to improve transparency in the case of any shares being transferred or assigned.

However as this is a private company owned entirely by Boohoo plc, I can't work out if it has any significance or not.

Ps. You don't need to read the actual articles, the last update on Companies House is the changed article. There is only one and it is actually dated 24th July

Thirdly it's not an emergency loans and we aren't currently paying anything on it.

Finally, Kodal's CEO isn't the CEO of the mining company so he has no reason to be at that meeting. We already know he has good working relationships with Mali

Firstly there is no we because you own no shares

Secondly Kodal don't have three partners, they have two.

Good to see you keep up the 100% garbage

Southcoast why do you keep making a complete tool of yourself. To clarify, here is the AI summary for filing accounts. So you got suspension wrong, you got this wrong, why keep embarrassing yourself with stuff you patently don't understand

A listed company with a February year end must file its annual accounts with Companies House within six months of the end of its financial year. For a February year end, this means the deadline is August 31st.

Key word there is accept Fed

Shareholders don't approve them, they are just presented to them.

Having said that I can't see them waiting until the 29th unless it is just pure bad news.

Do the articles say they will produce the accounts with the AGM notice Fed?

It does but I think the regulations say they have the six full calendar months after the year end to produce results

What's wrong with the 29th?

Good to see Topshop now has a website all of its own southcoast

Just think, a billionaire valued it at just slightly less than Debs total market cap value when it had no infrastructure or customers of its own.

£180m valuation for a brand name

What must Debs be worth southcoast

I expect they will reply privately

All Frasers asked for by Friday was an acknowledgement of receipt, which seems a strange request for an open letter. But we are in strange times I guess