Member Info for ElvisRocks

@wolff, if you want to see real balls, this case that I have followed is the best I’ve seen .. EYs biggest cheeses all tried to bully, pressure, remove, charm, dismiss, offer another fake job elsewhere in the world

.. the EY Partner stood his ground and won under immense pressure, even making himself unemployable in a Dubai case. Now cross reference that scenario to the audit partner wanting to stick his neck out on Cineworld, he would have been called back to HQ and told to get his views in line.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56564719

.. auditors report .. pile of poo .. think Carillion, Thomas Cook, Patitsserie Valarie, Cineworld .. pile of poo …

.. Wolffie don’t know what I am talking about on share trading but do on corporate reporting … those words you see are legalese wording the firm’s professional standards and risk management departments would have signed off, not the truth.

Same happened with Enron, ignore the shredding but the then firm, and in truth the other B4 are all in company’s pockets as they are / were their paymasters. The world has moved on in last 20 years but still not far enough

No audit firm has got the balls to qualify a listed entity as that in itself would start a run on the company. Imagine Mooky if he got wind of this smoke would be com8ng out of his ears coupled with a charm offensive to talk them round

… and Mooky would win, probably has fought off the insurers on his D&O insurance as well.

… where you should be looking Wolff is the 5 Year Viability Statement that is one notch up from a going concern statement… that again is a pile of poo ..

Those words “we knowingly know that there is a high chance of entering C11” .. can you see that anywhere, nope!

Wolff, no amount of posting from annual reports or audit reports will convince me, what you are posting is carefully choreographed words, common in the industry… not “we have brought advisors in as in 18 months time we think we may be toast and have to enter C11”

… do you see those words anywhere… nope!

.. what I said if I remember rightly mr Wolff is no audit firm has got the balls to qualify a listed company with the hard contrarian view and stand their ground … they get outflanked, their bosses rolled in and a “compromise” reached. It’s called professional scepticism where the auditors, including B4, are light years away from being able to demonstrate this to Joe Public

Look what happened with credit suisse a few months ago, auditors pwc tried to qualify on accuracy of cash flow forecasting under US SOX processes .. they got bashed to pieces by the company saying they “were responding robustly to this assertion”

.. a few days later credit suisse is toast.

On employees .. saw in the lawyers letter their had legal counsel (Mr Kravitz) seems to have jumped ship and thrown the towel in … meanwhile was greasy lawyers to the rescue with sorting him out with a “consultancy agreement”

My a..rse they were negative in their reporting, “nice words in a bad situation” not “tell it like it is” ie “we are contemplating possible C11 in 18 months time” … don’t see those words anywhere…

Nope … got burnt at 11p, out at 3p

P..isses me off all this corporate reporting “we are fantastic”, used to work in that industry but when push comes to shove f-all can be done about it.

Imagine now trying to take PwC to task for their role (2 or 1 year ago) .. good luck!

My point about misleading is they gave glowing words in annual reports about how fantastic they were … that’s why corporate reporting and here the auditors role is up to S..HIT.

Find a report that gives anything other than “we are fantastic” .. don’t exist, that’s where the misleading comes in, same as in the Financial Crisis or recent SVB Bank … such reports don’t exist

Need Jeff Bezos money to fix this …

we are f..poked mr k .. essentially the latest law fees docket says this was all being carefully rehe****d and agreed in a fca submission back in may.

daily trading volume is now 9m shares or £90k, they probably consider this an invalid market now and starting to breach listing regulations

@wolff, my argument for “sue”, which would need incredible deep pockets and a tortuous process is based on 2 years ago Cine directors “knowingly knew” this would end up at C11 but carried on and kept quiet (to the shareholder) whilst giving glowing write ups in the annual report - they probably just escape wrongful trading as creditors until C11 were paid.

Wish I could find the article where they mentioned it (was a belter with the application of hindsight) and had something to do with why they hired Alix Partners and PJT back then.

There is probably merit in that Mr K but how you do that … f.ook knows (Wolffie will).

I remember seeing an article a few months ago that Cineworld knew this would end in C11 up to 2 years ago, so had in effect been planning for it, even when the share price was £2 and covid was over, knowing that their options for raising more money, or rolling their current debt had run out.

Quite why the share price spiked to £2 after lockdown officially ended still is odd to me.

Sadly, if that sky news article is correct, which I suspect it is, this is how the greasy lawyers will move everything forward - in other words, file for administration will accompany FCA suspension of shares and delisting, and put in place their next steps.

So even if patience is successful, how (the mechanism) that shareholders would ever get refunded is very unclear. Expect the share to head to 0.01p in the next few days.

Suspect someone at Cine has briefed Sky News and what appears may be about to happen is broadly inferred from the most recent fees letter of those grease bags.

RNS imminent in my view.

.. come on Wolffie, you have been on this board since Year Dot, Mr K and others need you now, … don’t let them/us down!

“Your the Man”, “Boom Boom” as they would say on the golf course!

… @wolff … “Your the Man” here as they would say on the golf course, “Boom Boom” Freddie Couples would say other posters are asking for your input on numbers and your emotional intelligence on the matter!

… ever so silent all of a sudden, tail between his legs …?

Absolute Genius Patience, incredible achievement to get that motion submitted. I’ll put you up there with Lionel Messi!

So stick that in your pipe and smoke it Mr Wolff and Hexam, for all your huffing and puffing and thousands of posts on this board, you have got nowhere near what patience has done, in fact until the last day or so, continually blowing your fog horn on the opposite direction of travel …

David v Goliath, wonder what those grease bag lawyers will do now.

I tip my hat patience!

@MrK … Mr Wolff will have to check with his cheerleading double aka Hexam, he’s a self confessed LTH … surprised he hasn’t signed up yet …

.. der Wolff on the tax losses point, they have value ONLY within the concept of a NOL Motion that would have to be run, it is a specific bankruptcy concept hence why would they have done them in GM and Hertz when creditors weren’t made whole

For it to be a starter concept - and for new co to have valid access to them - you have to have at least 50% of pre bankcruptcy creditors agreeing to it (the Ad hoc loan group) and a large chunk of pre bankcruptcy shareholders agreeing to it (which I took to be at least mookys 20%).

That seems off the table now and they may have found a way round it with the Cayman Islands idea, which is all that tax work greasy EY have been doing to slim up the pole and keep on the gravy train of fees …