Member Info for DC2007

Have HL sent something to all clients about this do you know?

I'll go with £0.71p.

Why under 90 and not zero? What are you still valuing at £400mn? Not that I expect you to have put that much thought in.

CEO can't stick around long after this - less than two weeks ago, they didn't need new capital. What changed in such a short time? And how can any sensible investor trust a him/management again? All others comments from the results and presentation are immediately undermined: might as well pick at random what to believe or not.

Another couple of weeks and we'll get: 'ASOS is a tremendous business with a tremendous future. However, I've now realised that for this to be fully realised a change of leader is required, and as a consequence, I'll be stepping down from the role as CEO. I offer my successor my very best wishes for a prosperous and profitable future' (P.s. how long for the severance lump-sum to clear?)

Regarding in general brokers' quoted deadlines (and timescales) for transferring a holding from nominee into certificates: is the date they say the last date they must have received an investor's instruction by, or is it the date it must complete by to ensure the transference of beneficiary ownership is valid and recognised by all interested parties?

Ugh, ugly invective. Britain would be much better off without chumps like you.

So wherever you are , it smells rancid. One day you'll work out the coincidence.

I think the vote sails through. The price discovery mechanism has broken down for Poly and the market is being distorted by brokers imposing forced liquidation already. I couldn't even have a stab at explaining why the London equity is currently valued at £900m.

The SP is behaving somewhere between chaos and randomness and massive volatility seems the likeliest result, along with an huge increase or decrease. A basically stable and unmoved SP following the vote is the only outcome which would surprise me.

That was the standard blurb I got from Jarvis too earlier this week. I wonder if they'd give the same response to specific questions? Or, if there position has changed in response to the fluidity of the situation and the participants involved.

And yeah, answers on a postcard as to what sentence two means.

Bravo indeed to AJ Bell & props to ferret for getting this info.

If dividends can be paid for individuals' holdings left in a SIPP / ISA wrapper for this broker, does that mean an investor could retain the holding for however long they wished, and still have the option to convert to certificates at some future point (after the London listing is removed) if they wanted to transfer the holding to an AIX broker to exit?

If AJ Bell can do this, I wonder why other UK execution-only / nominee brokers aren't willing to do the same?

Really helpful stuff ferret - thanks for updating the board & looking forward to hearing how AJ Bell intend to handle things.

Morning ferret, thanks for posting the HL response. I don't I understand how that'll work, but HL then are implying that Poly shares held in nominee accounts *where they are also in a tax wrapper* - i.e. SIPPs and ISAs - will be retained rather than liquidated (forcibly sold).

A given investor's holding would then become effectively in escrow for an indefinite period, and there would of course be a complete embargo on selling some or all of the position.

Questions immediately follow:

What happens to any dividends paid by Poly with respect to these shares?

How long could the escrow/embargo period last? Can the escrow/ embargo ever be reversed?

And what happens if current Poly as an entity splits into Poly K and Poly R, with Poly K relisting on LSE? Would this nominee holder take beneficial ownership of however much Poly K became worth in the split? Or, because there'd at that point been an entire change to entity, would the holding effectively cease to exist for nil value?

I've no idea of answers to any of these. Tbh, I don't know if brokers do either and I'm not fully confident in what they might say (although it'd be better to have in writing).

AIX has a list of authorised brokers here: https://aix.kz/clearing-settlement/aix-csd-participants/brokers-1/page/3/

There's just over a couple of dozen after discounting those that are suspended according to the list. There are no UK domiciled brokers according to the list.

Why do they care so much about a listing getting suspended though? It happens for various reasons, usually with riskier stuff, and I don't see how the broker can force nominee holders to sell on the basis of possible upcoming suspension. Are they just after the commission from the sale, which would become unobtainable once an equity was suspended?

In theory, any equity trading in London could get suspended for some reason at some point in the future. Do they forcibly sell an investor's holdings when a future suspension date is announced, but before said date arrives? It doesn't add up.

Assume they had 17,700 shares at their average of £2.83, then their holding book cost is about £50,000. If a broker sold the lot today, that's 17,700 x about £1.90, for liquidation value of £33,600.

£50,000 less £33,600 is near enough £16,500 - the bitter pill they talked of. N.b. the £1.90 sell price is nominal and what I picked for the purpose of the calculating; it's based on the price Poly has been trading around much of today.

'Does this mean that HL, iWeb Jarvis etc. will NOT be able/willing to retain their nominee "pool" of total shares ownership and register that ownership with AIX CSD, the future registrar of record for the company?'

That's how I've been reading it. Get a sense it won't matter if a holding with a broker who doesn't deal in AIX is in a SIPP or ISA wrapper: no transactions would be possible, including receipt of dividends, because the brokers' not dealing in AIX takes precedent over whatever it HMRC means by recognising 'AIX' and instruments traded on it as being allowed to be held in ISAs/SIPPs.

It's common with countries in that region anon3 unfortunately. Turning the proposition around a little: until this situation with Poly, of those who've now done so, who had previously considered (or had) opening accounts with foreign brokers to trade on AIX? If not, why not? What would put you off?

This is the influence the situation is having on people who might otherwise have sounder judgement.

Along with the cliches and blustering delivery, most of your 'points' are quite lame BSR; they're not worth the bother of rebuttal.

'My biggest concern is, it's well, KZ, isn't it? Corruption is apparently rampant.'

Yeah, that's another elephant in the room. Some of this may be an effect of language translation, but the 'tone' of the AIX site isn't professional and because of that serves to reinforce my sense of unease.

Someone got triggered. Try a nice lie down BSR before trying to use words again.