Member Info for danieldavis

Ta!

Looking at every other year, we should be seeing interim results around about now...

But people keep posting about the next update being in September.

What did I miss? :)

That page said authorised etc on the 31st January too, so I suspect it's always said that.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220131114619/https://www.fca.org.uk/news/warnings/amigos-loan-clone-fca-authorised-firm

Sharebel - don't we actually need FCA approval to lend first?

They gave a few things to satisfy, only one has happened. The next should be fairly simple exercises (so long as the BOD haven't told any fibs) but they do need to actually happen. Can't just lend out the £35m.

The FCA said they anticipate approval "within 9 months of the scheme being sanctioned". Won't be overnight.

Chris888 - no, afraid not. It's £15m towards one point and then £70m for new lending. It's at least £85m and at least 19:1.

While details of an equity raise to partly fund a return to new lending have not yet been finalised, the £15m contribution to the Scheme is expected to be funded from an equity raise and new capital commitments of between £120m and £300m, of which it is hoped to raise a minimum of £70m in new equity. It is required that the new equity raise must be completed within a year of the sanction of the Scheme by the Court.

As much as I disagree with much of the ramping on twitter, that particular account has often tweeted about amigo.

Hence my question… (if you read the first post rather than going straight to rage posting, you will see I was asking if anybody could confirm - perhaps somebody else who was at the hearing).

Sure, although it’s not hard to search for (#AMGO).

https://twitter.com/aimissionary/status/1528734549903126528?s=21&t=eGKPyz7xACR74368DC93YQ

Somebody has tweeted that the new business scheme has been sanctioned.

Anybody able to confirm?

Craignews - I'm not talking out of my bum. I'm taking the exact wording of the RNS and not applying any of my own narrative to it.

You said 'As they’ve already stated, it’s a 2 day suspension for the duration of the hearing'. I said, they haven't stated that. Main reason for me saying that is because you're wrong. All they've said is that they'll request suspension before the hearing.

No, they've stated it's a temporary suspension from the 23rd until such time they have something to update the market.
That doesn't automatically make it just 2 days for the duration.

hedged - at least 19:1 raising at least £70m.

Both points clearly state "at least" in every mention...

It's not news though is it... Everybody has been on here saying it's a foregone conclusion all week.

If that's the case and everybody truly thought like that, then the price likely already factored in the perceived outcome.

We have a tiny bit more certainty, that's it (I was worried myself they'd vote down scheme 1, so happy enough with the outcome).

We still don't know;

1) When the dilution will be. People are saying 6 months minimum, that's never been officially stated. It says "within 12 months". Immediately after court is within 12 months.
2) What the dilution needs to raise. The RNS states minimum amounts.
3) If the judge will be problematic. I think this is highly unlikely provided that;
4) The FCA don't turn up. And whilst they've said they're happy and won't be, they've said that before (again, seems unlikely now).

They announced the results at 15:06 on the day of the creditor meeting last time…

No. They are voting on two schemes and one of those schemes is the wind down. You know that, right?
This delivers more money than the previous scheme that they voted for (this offers approx 29p in the pound). So your own argument of they voted for SOA1 and this is more money also supports them possibly voting for that...

I am saying that if I was a bitter creditor, I may well take the 29p option. It's more than the old scheme offered me and means I can give amigo a final kick on the way down. Reading the facebook comments on the official group, there is definitely some bitterness out there.

Personally, I think it's because the potential outcomes are more clear but with quite a lot of uncertainty around the rights issue.

1) Creditors vote for the re-lending version of events. Court approves (think that's a given now). Rights issue within 12 months (within 12 months includes 1 day, so don't rule that out either) for at least £70m. So it could be for £200m. It could be for £70m. It could be for any number between.

2) Creditors vote for the wind down. I don't think this should be ruled out, some of them are quite bitter AND this still delivers them quite a lot more money than the previous scheme. It shouldn't be ruled out.

If it's 1, I'm hoping to see a rise to around 20p then I'm off. If I can get that before court I'll take it. I think it's wishful thinking though, 15p might be all I can get.
If it's 2, I think shares become worthless...

No way to work out the cost

The RNS says it will be used to raise a ‘minimum’ of £70m.

You can’t assume it’ll only be that amount. They might want to raise 5x it. Minimum is a pretty key word in the release that most people like to ignore.

The rise is FOMO. The sell off is realism.

Both were anticipated. I'm not paying much attention this week, next week will be a much better indicator of sentiment. My average is now low enough that 8p puts me in profit, so I'm happy to hold up until court. Undecided if I will sell on the 20th or not, I've got a bit bored after 12 months of this... :D

There was no actual reason for the rise, so it was always going to drop back a bit. Once news is out next week, we should see a stickier move up.

Amigo ShareHolder Action Group. I suspect the initials got blocked for the last 4 capital letters...

My only nervousness is that I think the wind down option is also better than the previous scheme, so it's possible some people will lean that way out of spite, and still be better off than they were before.

If the wind down isn't better than the original offer, then I'm wrong and all is well :)