Member Info for DC2007

Had a look at the RevB RNS and it's a scorcher! Their analysis of Boo is unflinching and accurate. Boo have got into a dire mess here and it's all of their own creation. Those in glass houses...

I think they should exit RevB and cut any ties sharpish in an attempt to prevent further value erosion for their owners. If this debacle drags on, the Boo SP sinking into the 20s has got to be odds on. It could even make the teens.

BoD are just doing a dreadful job in every area of corporate activity. Yet they're still pocketing the multi-million pound remuneration for it.

As one poster on here might say, they're being such a 'hypocrit'.

They should sell the Rev stake and book the profit, instead of getting drawn into a tussle. The core business isn't doing well enough at all to justify a boardroom battle. If they pursue it - and keep releasing litigious RNSs - they're only going to erode even more shareholder value here. This might well mean hello to the 20s.

"I'm more interested in long term trends as I'm a long term investor."

I'd have to question their ability to identify these.

The same investor in 2020 said there'd be Boo dividends in 2023. They said the SP would probably not go below 150p; would almost certainly never go below 100p; and that it was flat impossible for it to go below 50p.

Boo should be sticking to their knitting, instead of involving themselves in a saga with RevB. The energy soaked up by this should be concentrated on reversing their own rapidly sinking revenues and non-existent earnings.

"plus i have never ramped this share, at 380p or any other price point."

Mate, that's deluded. You've ramped this to high heavens -- your posts on Boo could fill a catalogue.

I was holding with XO since before the invasion and they would still let me purchase as of Friday.

But week after week on here, there's been a chorus of plenty saying it's certain to 'rocket' next week. Why should next week be any different?

Oh tradey boy, you take everything to heart and so literally! Markets will do what they'll do and posts here aren't something to get worked up over -- try chillin out a bit mate.

'Still posting with the intellect and capability of a seven year old'.

Said by the poster who claims they never abuse or insult anyone. Only deals in facts, to hear them!

DC why is this sort of insinuation fine? Tsk, answering a question with a question! Butting in to someone else's discussion and ripping things out of all context.

You just want someone to argue with more than anything Little tradey boy. Yep, your argumentative for it's own sake, more than anything I'd say. Perhaps a legacy from when you 'worked the doors'...as if! But your comments do display narcissistic, megalomaniac and psychopathic qualities. I'd not really say there's any insinuation there.

I could drag up countless examples if I could be bothered, but I absolutely don't care about corroborating something which is prima facie. And you'd simply deny them all anyway and trot out all the ad-hoc excuses in the world to save the ago and self-delusions.

Hypocrit[e] takes an 'e', by the way - you misspell it again and again. You're welcome, and have a lovely evening.

Your input here is irrelevant and unwanted 5085. Casting insinuations and calling someone 'scum' is none too smart.

Tradey: it's a bulletin board of which you're an equal member. You're pompousness has no limits -- no one has authority to require another poster to be 'accountable'!

I thought the rate-rise coupled with the AGM could precipitate a sharp market reaction today, along with boardroom shenanigans. It was an opinion, speculative, just like your 'I guess'. It didn't turn out that way and so my prediction was, quite simply, wrong. Why make such a fuss of it? Don't let it bother you.

So little tradey, you're allowed your guess and to have unsubstantiated opinions about Boo's financial performance? But you've nearly worn out the report button for poor Pedro who's done exactly the same in offering opinions and guesses about the SP.

What gives mate? I thought you had degrees and A-levels, but such a plain inconsistency escapes you. Or you can see it, but have some delusion that you and you alone should have these special privileges (but they should be denied to anyone else)?

I'd claim no expertise in psychiatry, so happy to be corrected, but that's some blend narcissism, psychopathy and megalomania. Standard Bond villain trope really. Bet you were planning world domination, along with the ducks and the squirrels (assuming they're still talking to you), funded from ya brilliant investments.

Err coasty, the remuneration package was rejected by almost a full third of the votes (resolution 2). That was by far the one to watch. Everything else was routine rubber-stamping stuff.

'I'd guess that what they are signalling is that at the very least the expectation is to be at the top of guidance and maybe an improvement at the half year.'

Bless! He's managed to concoct something from the update and immediately present it as a fact. Boo said nothing about being at the 'top of guidance' or possible a half-year 'improvement' on that expectation.

Perfect demonstration of what he's done again and again, all without a scintilla of self-awareness of those misleading flaws. Needs a warning triangle on his posts, especially so the inexperienced can be suitably wary and not get caught up in his boundless arrogance & self-professed expertise at investing.

they've been making net losses lately, so all they need to do is reduce those net losses to satisfy the 'return to profitable growth' claim. 'profitable growth' is weird terminology which is open to being p****d differently.

unfortunately this is quite typical of what boo does. it's not clever - the market and investors who don't worship at the boo altar see through it.

There'll be no profit before before FY25. After that, in 26, the dividends are expected to start flowing.

"...just reinforcing the truth."

Truth stands on its own. It doesn't need reinforcement. Propaganda, in contrast, needs continuous buttressing if it's to persist.

I suppose that's chicanery to be expected from marketing/advertising types.

If he wants it, he'll be hoping it drops a fair bit further. Then he can make a low-ball offer in the hope that the majority of holders are desperate enough they'll accept it, simply as an exit. Those that were ramping this in the £3's and £4's - assuming they were also buying - look quite sunk.

Your welcome copper. But your insights are hopeless from what I've seen (dividends in three years, which you said here...in 2020; unlikely to go below £3; impossible for it to go below 150p; abusing and insulting anyone who suggested 50p was possible, etc., etc.).

Perhaps talk out your worries & fears with the squirrels and ducks; although on second thoughts, maybe not - that's not fair on them.