Member Info for FoMo

Horse's mouth.

How can you get a permit before the "terms of the deal" are signed? No government agency in the world would sign off on that basis.

Glad to see someone else doing some proper research. I too was a ticker and a FCT.

BUT...

Anyone here remember the Lithuania trials more than a decade ago?

What is the difference in Morroco that caused a proven pump design not to have been adequate? Or am I missing something?

"There is more to the RNS than first view.

Miles and others are taking nil-condition options at 1p in lieu of some of their salary for y/e 30 June 23. The total is for 2.2% of the entire company.

That is desperation accounting - not only to save cash but probably for benefit of auditors. We have to wait for the accounts to be published to see the whole picture."

Tommy

Thank you. An accountant who read the notes and not the spiel -- mea culpa ! But do note that £4.9m exceeds 50%.

I am still concerned that Note 4 shows >25% of Gross Income for FY23 is from Funded cases but there is no disclosure of the split between realised and revalued. I suspect the majority is unrealised and therefpre may be at risk and I think we need a properly structured question for the AGM.

Add to that the restated as "long term" for the "large case" from FY21 and the disclosed and repeat banking covenenant concerns and I think we really do need some further clarification asap.

On the 50% point do remember that the losing parties costs are restricted to the 50% limit which leaves any funder at significant risk of loss - that is why most law firms won't do DBA's as they are at risk of not recovering their costs.

Isn't it the case that the 50% limit for civil litigation is for the total of all "legal fees" (including VAT) and "funding costs"? The IP gets to keep 50% of the Gross under all circumstances. LIT's RNS is worth a read as they seem to be 100% in the clear.

"Of the 23 (out of a total of 390 live cases) that are Funded cases, Manolete is working with specialist counsel to determine any amendments that may be required to the terms of Manolete's standard funding agreement."

BUT see Linklaters note from link below about past expenses rather than going forward. Perhaps we will have firmer numbers at the AGM

Is there a possibility that the future payments are at risk? Might the payee be able to run an argument about illegaility?

There must be a risk that the extended payment terms might be unenforceable if the Payee argues to re-open the case.

There must also be a risk that liquidators with personal liability will have to seek to claw back if their Statutory Bond insurer kicks off, and/or creditors start to ask for more - nb dissolved companies can always be reinstated and perhaps some entrepreneur will be thinking about seeking to buy up unpaid creditor claims and go for the IPs and their insurers and funders.

I think the decision is that such arrangements have always been unenforceable (subject to contract wordings) and if that is the case then I suspect the 6 year rule kicks in and Creditors can compel liquidators to act.

I do think the Directors should put out a clarification and "best impact estimate" statement

Cartel cases are all purchased

More than 25% of Net Realised Revenue in FY 2023 was for Funded cases. See Note 4 in accounts.

Clawback risk?

I thought they did some long time ago.

One reason is that the IP is not QED's but jointly (percentages unknown) with the Akzo spin-off Nouryon.

Do read the details.

The placing won't get to the 12 months needed for the auditors to sign off.

Leandra equipment still to be upgraded.

Is this the link you need?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YZsoCvvY3k

hTTps://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/05267512/filing-history

From the ADVFN board:

"Will be interesting to see the impact of last week's Cartel decision on MANO's valuation of "The Cartel cases".
hTTps://www.catribunal.org.uk/judgments/1284-royal-mail-1290t-bt-judgment-7-feb-2023

My quick take is that the award of 5% damages of "total value of commerce" is largely based on chassis alone prices (est 20%) and the total 10,000 trucks.

We know next to nothing about the number of trucks in tne MANO cases so perhaps the BOD will give us un early update on how the BT/RM £15,277,965 amount (pre interest) compares to the carrying value of £13,200,000 in MANO's accounts. NB all of last year's profit was attributable to the £5+M uplift on the Cartel cases.

Can anyone shed any more light on the implied >7,500 trucks in MANO's portfolio?"