Member Info for gruntie

There is no yield. The company is loss making, banned from paying dividends and faces insolvency as its debts are higher than it's cash holdings - if you believe there's no other option after a failed SOA.

Could be an attractive yield in a few years time if your in for sub 15p (and the company survives).

Wibi, I also picked up on the wording in the judgement. The judge repeatadly says "This scheme" (with "this" being underlined). Again, not "The" scheme or even "a" scheme, rather "this" scheme. I think this leaves the door open either for SOA 1.1 (slight revisions to current one) or SOA 2.0.

Retawellby, I think that's false. The judgement states;

"There will doubtless be additional costs but these should not be exaggerated: work has already been done which is likely to feature in any revised proposals (such as the processes for lodging and adjudication of redress claims).None of that would be wasted, and any revised proposals would build on the existing Scheme."

The fact the judge says "revised proposals" and "Build on the existing scheme" indicates that Amigo can alter SOA 1.0 and call it SOA 1.1. Afterall, if claimants voted 95% in favour of the "unfair" deal, why would a better deal need a re-vote when its more beneficial the creditors?

Neb, The judge's report came at 19:20, it's not even been 24hrs yet.. Even if (and very big if) they were planning to file for adminsitration, give them f*cking time to get their ducks in a row and the paperwork completed.. jesus

The fact the Judge says there no reason to go into Admin means that's now highly unlikely. If you'd read these boards for the past few weeks & months, I think every Tom, D*ck and Harry knew the Admin part was a bluff. You can't ask for people to take a 90% hit, and still have other options in the room when there was only X or Y on the table.

I've said this in previous threads. We're only here because everyone expects their "claim" paid there and then. Just read the likes of debtcamel - customers are jumping on FOS/Amigo as soon as the 7 days (or whatever time frame) has lapsed. If the FCA/FOS allowed Amigo to pay £20m (for exmaple) a year, and was done on a first come first served basis, whilst its a ball and chain on Amigo for a while, it just means everyone gets 100% of their due, but some have to wait a good chunk of time. Amigo can then carry on with the day to day business stuffand we wouldn't be here.

In the Judge's report, he uses PwC figures;

"The estimated realisable value of ALL’s assets, including its loan book, are expected to be between £312-£325 million, depending on the collection strategy adopted by an administrator. PwC have estimated the costs of insolvency to be £37 million. "

I can get onboard with this opinion. Afterall, 15% is around £6m at today MCap. Way less than I suggested they throw in.. Also allows us to have a rapidly rising SP without it biting us in the arse as the creditors also get the ride the wave.

Yup, I agree Daave. I'm still in a small profit (% wise) even after todays drop into the 9's so this will now be folded into my watchlist that don't really get looked at, and maybe see if theres a nice suprise in a few months time (sure there'll be a suprise one way or another haha).

https://www.amigoscheme.co.uk/legal-documents

Bottom pdf file. Called ALL scheme judgement.

https://www.amigoscheme.co.uk/legal-documents it's the bottom document called ALL scheme judgement

How can anyone be called a ramper when they literally hold 3% of the business... If that doesn't show faith I don't know what does. Whether that decision is right or wrong is a different question.

We're now only worth £60m, down from the FCAs £140m valuation.. this will be my silver lining ;)

The shares were only suspended to stop people on the call having an unfair advantage (i.e selling up quick if things were going downhill, or hoovering up shares before SoA was agreed). Because everything is still in limbo, nobody has an advantage now and the shares should be traded freely.

I suspect the SP will see a good % drop, but those who have confidence may take it as an opportunity to load up at prices not seen for weeks.

The problem with offering more up now will just show the initial SOA was not the fairest it could be. Of course Amigo could chuck another £5m into the pot and it wouldn't make a dot of difference in the grand scheme of things. But if Amigo now move, whats to say there isnt a better deal to be had still which returns creditors more of what they're due?

Luckily the Judge said there shouldn't be an A la carte menu of options/schemes, and provided AMGO can back up their statements with facts and figures (and PwC lend a hand here) then I think we should be alright.

Obviously, if I knew we could get away with adding more without the FCA/Creditors saying "aha! we knew there was more, now show us the rest" I'd hand it over in a heart beat.

My AJBell account was showing 14p at 8am this morning (and near had a heart attack), so it's a figure on the system prior to what's been said and happened today - it's not AJbell guessing the future SP.

It's not looking pretty, and far from a "Shoe in" but I think we'll still come out the other side.

Debt for Equity seems far fetched, this is normally done by big companies. Surely not within the FCA's remit to run a business for the benefit of customers/creditors and doubt theres an Amigo customer or Debt Camel could run it. Would have to find a whole C-Suite of professionals, but can't see Amigo 2.0 getting off the ground if all existing shareholders got wiped.

Mouse, it's not to distribute the money (as bond holders rank ahead of creditors) but would be for Amigo to be owned by those creditors rathan than the current share holders (us) and they benefit from the dividends and share value increase in the future.. They're saying the debt could be around £500m, but AMGO is only worth £140m (£112m now) so theres not enough equity to swap for the debt (hence they take control).

Insider, I would agree with what you're saying, but what I mean is, there no way to draw that conclusion without also allowing for the fact 92% of the customer might not have known (however remote that may be) and it's an argument that couldbe made. Unless I suppose if AMGO can offer up info that another 300k customer clicked the "I dont feel I have a claim button" in the portal (again, however remote that may be).

I think Pupper is right that once the SOA opens up, some people who couldnt be bothered thinking there might be enough NO's, or couldnt be bothered, or thought the text they got was a scam may well come forward.

Malpenn - Totally agree, and the reason why players are leaving the market is FCA state the loans need to be "affordable" and doesn't require more lending to repay the debt. What's affordable? Obviously if someone is missing utility bills I'd agree that's unaffordable, but if someone has to tighten their belts by cutting ties with luxury contracts, subscriptions or purchases, that's totally affordable (in my eyes) but the FCA doesnt define what's"affordable".

Robbo - I think the fact AMGO created easy to consume videos and re-jigged the wording in the FAQ's should help to ensure they made this as easy to understand as possible. My two concerns are (and neither is about the FCA back tracking) is, were enough customers reached? Only ~8% voted so was there a flaw in the way they reached customers? And the whole "Vote for your money" slogan, is a bit mis-leading as not everyone who votes is entitled to redress.

The problem is "fair" is different to each stakeholder and even variations of each stake holder. Im sure claimants who didnt know they had a claim will say 10% is fair, whilst those who stand to lose thousands in watered down settlements might think anything under 80% of what they're due it unfair. SHareholders who have held from IPO or many pounds per share will likely say whats on the table is fair as they've seen their investments/pensions reduced by many multiples, whilst those who have bought in at the lows could easily stomach more money being put in the pot.

I think FCA's "fair" is as much as Amigo can possibly offer up, without going belly up. And its probably hard to put a figure on that..