Member Info for hxulcolrdoh

At the point at which the SC introduced considerable clarity the FCA and Nikhil Rathi seem to have bent over backwards re introduce confusion and uncertainty ?

What is going on ?

IPF have certainly left VANQ (the other offspring of PFG) in their wake as they steamed ahead in recent years.

Over the past two years under new management VANQ have had a complete overhaul and may be about to have their day in the sun. Potentially it could be profitable to check out what VANQ have to say for themselves on Thursday 7 August.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/VANQ/notice-of-interim-results-investor-presentations-0kqg7kf2vzugvs0.html

Although the target of cowboy claims outfits today's Supreme Court Car finance judgement should kill any nagging 'no smoke without a fire' doubts that VANQ was (despite their assurances to the contrary) going to incur the cost of car finance compensation claims.

For those that want to wade through 109 pages

https://supremecourt.uk/uploads/uksc_2024_0157_0158_0159_judgment_2bb00f4f49.pdf

Https://supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2024-0157

Today I see JUST are up 67% on the back of an offer.

There does seem to be something in the air.

Basher - re CBG potentially being a sitting duck

There does seem to be something in the air. Yesterday IPF announced a possible offer. Today JUST is up 67% on the back of an offer. In both cases state side vultures appear to be circling.

If the sky doesn't fall in CBG can't afford to tread water.

To quote the company "The audited annual accounts will be released no later than during August 2025."

But I wouldn't care to bet on it.

Interesting.

IPF have certainly left VANQ in their wake as they steamed ahead in recent years.

If I was an IPF holder I'd be thinking brilliant - I can take my profits from a fully priced IPF and roll at least some of them them over into a VANQ that is hopefully just about to come good (we will have a better idea next Thursday).

For what its worth the Martin Lewis take on imminent SC ruling

https://x.com/MartinSLewis/status/1948790812562673729

A verdict on the car finance misselling (alledged) issue that is raging elsewhere is to be delivered next Friday

https://supremecourt.uk/news/future-judgment

VANQ hold to the view that they should not be caught up in it (though at least indirectly via cowboy CMCs they are). Quote

· Vanquis believes its position is materially different from the cases subject to the ruling, with all customers signing a pre-contractual document confirming a commission will be paid.

· The judgment relates to dealer broker commissions. Only c.10% of Vanquis' Vehicle Finance commission payments between January 2013 and October 2024 were made to dealer brokers, representing £23m in commissions.

· In accordance with IAS 37, the Group has not made a provision for this matter but has recognised a contingent liability.

· As previously stated, Vanquis is not subject to the FCA's ongoing Motor Commission Review, which is focused on Discretionary Commission Arrangements (DCAs). Vanquis did not participate in DCAs.

The ever excellent Patrick Boyle musing on why big plans fail and pining for days when even a nascent rural Ireland built the then worlds largest hydroelectric dam in 3 years in the 1920s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtApa3PA0J4

Fast forward to the present day and in Western "hyper democracies" everyone has a veto, no one has responsibility and well intentioned regulation ensures that nothing gets done without a 31,000 page environmental impact statement. Constructing even a modest road would take a decade for consultation and probably mandate tunnels for bats/badgers/assorted vermin.

Maybe the good old days were the good old days.

The ever excellent Patrick Boyle pining for days when even a nascent rural Ireland built the then worlds largest hydroelectric dam in 3 years in the 1920s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtApa3PA0J4

Fast forward to the present day and in Western "hyper democracies" everyone has a veto, no one has responsibility and well intentioned regulation ensures that nothing gets done without a 31,000 page environmental impact statement. Constructing even a modest road would take a decade for consultation and probably mandate tunnels for bats/badgers/assorted vermin.

I've since noticed from their FY presentation

"We are planning to reduce our LTV to within our target range of 35% to 45% by further disposals"

I think this will help with market perceptions.

Are we sure it is not Alan Partridge ?

I do notice that the company has been featuring LTV more prominently in their communications in recent times.

Whilst less of an industry outlier it is still quite high at 50%.

I do suspect that if debt and LTV were reduced the market would have more confidence to reflect the book value in the market cap. If this is not the problem can anyone come up with another theory about why the share price is so depressed ?

If I look at CLI the two things that stand out for me are

POSITIVE : an unusually attractive market cap to book value.

NEGATIVE : an unusually large debt to market cap.

Are these two things related? Probably. It implies that in the absence of management dealing with the negative there is not going to be much progress on the potential positive?

Good link rossannan.

As I have a said "'Net Zero' is a MORONIC term. It doesn't mean zero emissions. It just means emissions have been moved in time or space (and there were probably more of them)"

Do a deep dive into most 'Green Tech' that includes the FULL LIFE CYCLE costs as opposed to a convenient 'point of use' snapshot and it is the same result - BEVs being another classic scam.

The most interesting part of the video was the 3 or 4 mins starting @ 25mins.

Government policy seems to have nothing to do with common sense or balance but rather what is trending on Twitter.

'Net Zero' is a MORONIC term. It doesn't mean zero emissions. It just means emissions have been moved in time or space (and there were probably more of them). Peter has been robbed to pay Paul.

THANK YOU BlueRaphus for your thoughts on IQE!

They are much more coherent than the generic slop / investment case (https://www.iqep.com/investors/investment-case/) on the company's own website.

More recently they have moved a CFO with Intel connections into the CEO role. Maybe she can knock some sense into them (but she doesn't look like a 'Tony'). I'll keep an eye on them from the sidelines.