Member Info for FrankyS1971

Donor - Its not abuse you should be concerned about, its more around what and why you would invite it on your doorstep. Maybe huntress you or anyone else should pause and think "why am I attracting this abuse and is it deserved". Now the answer to that is binary. Its yes I deserve it or no, I don't. I'd say 90% you're a douche, just being obstructive on purpose or plain thick. See, this isn't so binary after all. I mean there might be a nuclear war tomorrow. Its like 50/50. It can or cannot happen. Is that right?? Clearly it isn't unless in Donors World which sounds like a coin toss. Lots and lots of tossing going on.

The only reason the LTIP is there is to attract talent and the board buys like GJ were made to stabilise the SP and give investors more confidence that there was a plan of action. There is no issue imo with this and these will be the legal arguments. If mgt make a decent wedge from this well good for them. They ve gone into a dicey situation risked their reputations and couldnhave gone to a stable environment with a nice bonus. But they took the risk and like us ahould be exponentially awarded. There are strong arguments against anything the FCA wants to winge about.

Thats goood LT my skim reading let me down so glad they don t stand by the the friwnds and famiiies comment ehich is absurd!

The boss of Amigo Loans has said it will fall into insolvency if a landmark court judgment goes against it this week.

Gary Jennison said he had warned the Financial Conduct Authority that the sub-prime lender faced collapse. But the watchdog told him 'friends and family' would help fill the gap in the lending market if his firm went bust, he said.

On Wednesday, Amigo, which specialises in loans guaranteed by friends or family, will hear if it can go ahead with its compensation scheme for customers.

The plan was drawn up after Amigo was flooded with complaints from claims management firms over mis-sold loans. About 95 per cent of customers have voted in favour of the plan, but it has been said to short-change borrowers, and the FCA said last week it would oppose the plan in court.

Logistics aside which incidentally makes a dilution a non starter what would the purpose be?.. to up the yes vote from 95 to 99%???

I hope it wasn t guinness Bryn..what a waste-))!

What a pea brain huntress...you think they should come out and declare it a SHOE IN like all arrogant...GJ on the couch going.."whatevs mofos'....if you cant read between the lines try and read betwen this one:
You thick total are end bell and need to life get.

#claims# that should read

Hi LTH..you re too kind mate-)..i think GJ and the initial hires did for me..at the time i thought i d have a window for making a decision. But then it became about backing the management. I got stick for being 'in' but agreeing that ains would overwhelm us so the ringfencing word came up and thats the point i just thought let it ride. You wouod have to be a fruitcake to bail now. But even bigger one to bail just cos we see 35p for example. Why would you sell immediately after the business has entirely derisked...? Wouldn t make sense..exciting times coming.

Wjy does it matter about the timeline? Lets say you bought at 10p and you decide you want 1 quid for your shares. In other words you want 1000% return. Do i care if that haopens in 1 or 4 years??? Of course not. Yes sooner is nice. Tomorrow would be great...but if someonw.said i can get you 1000% return over 6-7 years...holy hell people would climb over dead bodies to get that. I guarantee amigo well eventually see 2 quid yet alone 1..it ll take time...but who the hell cares as we re in at the basement and now its just a lovely LT hold. Trading your way to the dame return over the same timeframe.is fraught with difficulty and doesn t make for a serene life.

Of course RS..i didnt quite finish the train of thought off..i meant to say..this is more ammo.to encourage traders to just hold...give it another 9 months..

I have a hunch that the rise may be tempered. The FCA throw their toys out and make noise about tight regulation and restrictions as they make us all panic over the relending for a few days...no doubt this will also be bluster.

Why go into a sanction with the SP booming. Hadly what they call a 'puppy dog' close. It suits for us to be vulnerable and that will be reflected in a volatile and fragile SP..go tona cour sanction with a 300% rise during the process and....well..yeah..smack of it being a done deal and infers unfairness if its too obvious a shoe in. Even though you all know my opinion on that!-:::))

The useful nugget on offer is that any cry of unfairness relates to ALLco not Amigo. This is a separate company for the purposes of the scheme. Any action around regualation won t be applied to Amigo on thr basis of what the view is on ALLco. The new processes and checks will be judged 9n their own merit and i m sure will get a clean bill of health.

Hey stevie...irony would be to get the big thing at the end wrong..but i m backing against that happening! Have a great weekend!

Par for the course i reckon GG -))!!

...there are no unknowns here the vote happened because the class of voter and methodology was agreed by the court. ..the court asked Amigo to make sure they did their best to reach out to all past customers. That happened. The information was asked to be clear and made concise and understandable, it was. The lawyers made sure that the process was lawful and 95% agreed its the fairest outcome. That's all folks. its not 85% its 99%. Regardless of the press and the posturing and derampers why are people being so damn thick. There is no basis of law in what the FCA has to say. The process and the SOA have been agreed BECAUSE it complies with the law and the creditor meeting would have uncovered any unfair or foul play...they voted at the end of the session 11-1 FOR and that was after discussing Fairness. Wakey Wakey people.

What bonus? The one they get in 4 years? Its an LTIP with conditions.

TF filtered. Another douche with nothing to say. Sad little lad.

LTH the paragraphs you refer to are in context to this SOA which is designed for a shareholder vote and takeover. Hence only 77% approval rate. Different audience. Main takeaway is that court isnt there to judge on fairness of scheme but the fairness of the process its transparency and its integrity of approach. FCA may have valud points. The court will say, we agree it could be fairer BUT its not our place to conceive what tge alernative is. We can only judge on merits of this SOA and its efficacy. Its been run correctly. 95% want it therefore we sanction it but empathise with FCA perpsective. ShOE IN.