Member Info for Bfdinvestor

So you reckon they can quickly flip nearly 9% of the total equity

I suppose we should all bow to your superior knowledge on flipping lol

So why are they selling sc if kodals price is going to go up?

Why are they buying it if they don't think it is undervalued bloggs

It's in Chinese!

Only they aren't keeping it with the 1200 staff are they southcoast. The staff have mostly gone. The warehouse is up for sale with vacant possession.

Southcoastbather

Posted in: DEBS

Posts: 9,487

RE: City AM29 Jan 2026 11:00

Burnley isn't closed and they are now keeping it and the 1200 staff

Buffalo I'm long here obviously

I'm here for Debenhams as I said when I first posted here a couple of years ago.

My plan is review position at 50p and 75p.

As I posted the other day, if the transformation plan delivers I don't see why 75p isn't possible this year.

What is your position

So ignoring the idiocy of the trolls

There is agreement for a Malian company to buy all of SC's shares, but the deal hasn't completed yet as far we know

Once it does, and SC notify Kodal, I'm sure the appropriate RNS stream will follow

The final people were always planned to go in February southcoast. The warehouse is up for sale with vacant possession as the preferred option

You said the warehouse was staying open. There is no evidence to support that whatsoever.

Don't you think someone would have told the local paper by now lol

There is one lying narcissist on this board but it isn't me

That's fantastic news, well done George!

So 500 staff had gone from Burnley by the end of November southcoast, with the rest scheduled to go in January and February.

There is no mention in the local press that this plan has been reversed

Before you talk about your supposed expertise, you also claimed suspension by mid August last year and admin before the AGM

That CFD must be hurting lol

The pricing mechanism has been communicated

The term has been communicated.

The fact it is take or pay has been communicated

The floor price at the moment is irrelevant

The expectation for the minimum off take has been communicated. Once again it's irrelevant at the moment as planned production far exceeds it. If it had changed when the OTA went live, per your and Bloggs's logic, the change would have had to be communicated.

They are never going to release the detail of the OTA, nor should they. It is a commercially sensitive contract between THREE bodies.

So what else do you think you need to know at a summary level Badomen

The

I thought I would check the local paper southcoast.

There is nothing in it about the warehouse remaining open.

Indeed the last article from last year states that 500 have already left and the remaining 700 will go in January and February

You would imagine would you southcoast.

Personally I doubt it

So Cityam is linking two things which aren't linked.

The Burnley site is up for sale with vacant possession.

The Debenhams RNS makes no reference whatsoever to Burnley being maintained

Incorrect Arthur, go check Gwmo, it had a far more stupid day

Bloggs and badomen seem to be going round in circles and disproving their own arguments

So to summate

The off take agreement is a is a tripartite agreement as it includes the government

The key points of the offtake have been communicated

Bloggs and badomen both seem to think the minimum amount is price sensitive. So, by their logic of it had changed from the original expectation it would have had to have been communicated. Which means it hasn't changed

I sold a tranche this morning when I followed the trades and could see the MMs walking it down for no logical reason whatsoever

The same thing happened late afternoon

So this has nothing to do with fear of a placing,there wasn't the sells to justify that

It's all to do with Spreadex and Shore Capital imo

I genuinely wish Brian would request a suspension and investigation. This level of chicanery shouldn't be tolerated

That’s my point Albatross the final terms of the signed agreement have not been announced

Why would they be. It's a commercially sensitive document

No it isn't southcoast

It offers either vacant possession or a SHORT TERM lease back to Boohoo.

How would they offer vacant possession with 1200 people on site.

Maybe you can confirm where you have seen Burnley is staying open as it isn't in any RNS and the trading update talks about acceleration of the transformation plan

I'm a real holder, been here for years, I sold a tranche this morning when I saw the MMs start to walk it down as usual for no logical reason whatsoever

The way this share is played is frankly a disgrace.

I wouldn't object if Brian asked for a suspension and an investigation. The market cap is about a third of net assets. It's less than just the value of the scrap gold.

The sp is 10% lower than the consolidation price, when the assets were nowhere near as well understood as they are now.

It's strange that you miss the part of the RNS that states minimum 8k tonnes per month Badomen. If there had been no figure given, I'd be minded to agree with you. However, that isn't the case is it.

I don't have blind faith in anyone. Nor do I doubt everything. I simply believe that if the 8k figure quoted, if it changed and was price sensitive, would have to be communicated.

The more important figure is 125k anyway

As I keep saying badomen your position has no logic at all

You think the minimum amount is price sensitive. An expectation has been set, so if it changed then that would have to be communicated.

You state that as no figure has been communicated, then we should assume that no figure has been agreed. Despite an expectation being set via RNS and agreeing that a take or pay agreement without a minimum figure would be unprecedented.

We aren't going to agree on this, so no point going round in circles, that only helps the likes of Bloggs.

The key figure in any event is the amount of product Vs Kodal's stated ambition which is equal to the permitted amount.

I don't think this is a case of poor Comms from Kod