The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
I suspect it could just be the recently exercised warrants being sold at a time when there isn’t much volume/liquidity - from a price of 0.01p they won’t care what they get for them! The fact that Bybrook holds so many should in theory limit the amount we see exercised at the moment - as it would take them above 30% (if they wanted to exercise now it makes no sense to me that they’d have taken the amount of placing shares that they did!).
Even more bizarre when you consider that the company had $3 million in the bank at the end of June - so why place at a discount immediately afterwards and then use that money to buyback shares above the placing price! Feels like some sort of pump/spoof going on by the company!
Not one I personally would want to invest in until after the outcome of a judicial review is known, whenever that might be. Plus I’m very bearish on this whole sector and have been for some time (largely due to regulation and complaints) plus my expectation of higher delinquency rates once the loan repayment freeze and furlough comes to an end). I see the chances of Amigo recovering as being much higher with JB back in charge though - especially if he is able to persuade Glen Crawford to stay, as he still hopes to do.
I only have one account and have had the same one since 2009 - as admin here will verify I’m sure! If I’m going to say something then I will do so under my own, real name - I’ve no need to hide behind made up avatars (I post on Twitter under my real name)! I rarely post on LSE these days as the boards generally seem to be more about posters having a pop at each other than actually discussing the fundamentals of companies!
TheMuir - you seem to be making the assumption that I agree with TW’s assessment of James Benamor, which I don’t! That is one of the reasons I’m happy to contribute to that site - I’m free to have my own opinion, even if it disagrees with other writers, including TW! If I was a shareholder I’d vote for JB - hence why I’ve regularly posted links over the past week (which JB retweeted himself) explaining how those PIs with shares in nominee accounts can actually vote, as most don’t realise that it isn’t as straightforward as they might think in many cases!
Jimmy - I'm aware of that but maybe wasn't clear enough when I mentioned it. It is why it is potentially such a big issue for the company, if those complaints relate to loans over a number of years (during which time multiples of the loan book value will have been cycled - JB mentions around £1.5 billion of loans in recent years). Just accepting that the FOS will find in favour of the complainant in the vast majority of cases brought to it isn't an option - the 'no win, no fee' outfits will have a field day! Hence seeking a judicial review to challenge the outcome of those cases, and also with regards to future lending criteria.
Expru - he has stated he won't buy any shares until instated as CEO and approved. he can't do anyway with an irrevocable buy order in place for that amount, as it risks him being forced to make a bid for the entire company! He has been very careful to ensure he will remain below 30%...
Opulentia - the buyback resolution only sets a minimum price of 0.25p, there is no mention of 25p! It is just a standard resolution - they already have that authority now and could have bought back any time in recent months (it was passed by a vote at the 2019 AGM). That resolution is just a standard one that they'll include each year. The RNS today also confirms no plans for a buyback - pretty sure they'd also need FCA approval for a buyback anyway, as a regulated company with liquidity tests etc.
Should have read 'number of complaints' - the site went weird whilst I was typing and kept freezing!
Senator - the going concern statement relates to uncertainty surrounding the complaints. This boardroom battle is all just a side show - you say that they shouldn't take on the FCA and the FOS, but unless they do and can win a judicial review, the am out of complaints have the potential to be huge, plus the whole business model is almost obsolete (if it is upheld that the borrower, and not just the guarantor, needs to be able to afford the loan - if that is the case it is almost pointless having a guarantor!).
The most interesting thing to look for if the vote passes, in my opinion, is what Glen Crawford actually does. On the face of it his statement about leaving etc looks like he doesn't want to work with JB, but a lot of the wording was also ambiguous enough that I wouldn't bet on him going. JB needs someone to run the subsidiary (which is the regulated part of the business) who is FCA approved and regulated (GC was previously and is in the process of becoming so again), and I think the best chance of survival will be with the two of them working together again - if that was a possibility.
Hereshopin - I think you may be getting confused with some of the other tweets questioning the JB agreement! I have never said that I doubt that he will go ahead and buy 29% if he comes back as CEO, or will try and get out of it, as I replied to several of the people claiming that he would do! I see the best chance of this surviving , is with JB back in charge - given it was him who originally highlighted the complaints problems and lack of action by the current BOD!
James Benamor seemed quite happy to engage with me and also seemed grateful when I corrected him on the '25p buyback', judging by his tweet saying thanks and admitting he had got that wrong...
Hereshopin - sadly your typical of so many posters these days. You try and attack the character of people, yet don't have a single thing to say to actually refute anything that I've said about the company. That's usually a sign of a low IQ...
Majorboy - wondered where you'd disappeared to! Rare I come on here these days - was just reading the RNS via this site and replied to a comment I saw. I don't see that RNS as changing anything really - ignoring a lot of the rubbish that people were spouting over the weekend (most of which was incorrect or would contravene the rules anyway), there was nothing new or unexpected in the response today from the BOD.
I would imagine that the FCA would take rather a dim view of the CEO of the company recommending that shareholders vote against something, and for him to then vote the opposite way. I'd be amazed if it was legal for him to do so!
Glen Crawford can't vote for JB - he is part of the board of directors who have just recommended that shareholders vote against the proposals. In terms of the buyback - as I posted before, it is just a standard resolution included each year to give them the authority to do one, should they be in a position where it made sense to do so (currently it would make more sense to buy back the bonds not the shares!).
Personally I would be very disappointed if we get a takeover after having held so long and feel that we wouldn't get anywhere close to the value that could be seen in production. Rare that you ever see takeovers at a really large premium to the SP either and would hate to see this taken out at 7-8p!