The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring financial educator and author Jared Dillian has been released. Listen here.
Perhaps he expected the threat of a Press Release to be the catalyst for a settlement but when it did not arise, he had no choice to publish or lose credibility from then on. We do not know the background but it seems a little early to be playing your Aces in a legal dispute. The significant threat of disclosure ceases to be a weapon once the disclosure is made! That is not to say his case does not have merit, in all likelihood it does given WGP's history.
Why would someone go to all that effort to impersonate him when it could be denied in minutes with a WGP Press Release? The share is suspended so who would care enough to do it? If the allegations are not true, then WGP's contracts are water tight. Seems like a lot of effort for so little gain. The Twitter account mentioned (the most ludicrously pointless website in existence) has 215 followers. I am no expert but that seems a lot for a fake account.
It does appear to have burnt bridges for an amicable settlement. Either he has bolted to early as you say or this has been going on for a while. It feels like Cityboyz mentioned this quite some time ago. I have had two lovely holidays since he first mentioned it! You never know until you hear both sides of course. What can we do but watch it unfold. It remains fascinating.
It is written by a Solicitor and includes both the Solicitor and Mr Pearson's contact details including his verified mobile number. It happens to be released on a blog. If people have spoken to him, it seems credible to me. If you can indeed link to it from the same LinkedIn profile we were looking at when he was appointed in June, that would seem to further strengthen its authenticity no?
Thank you for that. I think I owe you an apology for questioning your credentials a few weeks ago when this first started happening. The Board has a rather chequered history though so my natural suspicion is not unreasonable! If this is such a big deal, would you not expect statements to be issued by the Clubs in question? Is Mr Pearson in contact with them directly or is he now cut off from them?
Thanks both. I think that is the standard response we will get from all parties from now on. We will just have to wait and see what transpires over the next few days. I believe if they had definite good news, they would be more forthcoming although that does not necessarily mean bad news. Perhaps it is potentially good news that is not quite signed and sealed yet. How is that for optimism?
Has anyone, or anyone we know of in this forum actually spoken or corresponded with Neil Riches or Stephen Pearson in person since this happened? I do not mean a contact/colleague/relative/friend of them. Neil or Stephen themselves?
It might be worth trying to speak to him. The generic address will probably be answered by standard customer service staff who will give a standard PR answer on the basis the partnership arrangement is still valid. I think your comment to Pal at 20.47 is likely correct - something has fallen apart but they are working hard on an alternative to try to save it. If the proposed deal terms were attractive on paper to the Clubs, you would think they will give WGP a little time at least to see if they can recover it. I find it hard to believe Clubs would just let non-payment go without some assurances. They are hardly bastions of strong business ethics!
They will tell you verbally but not in writing? A bit odd as you would expect they either have an official position they are willing to stand by or will say nothing at all until that is the case. Probably best not to tell them you are from a Bulletin Board when you call and you might glean more information.
Thanks for the update. Unless I am reading the posts wrong, and I admit I have read them quickly, no one seems to be saying the deals did not happen but that the obligations to pay under those signed contracts cannot now be fulfilled. That seems to be the implied meaning for the Premiership Club comments anyway - to be paid from the announced investment which if it fell apart as stated means the obligations to pay by Worldlink cannot be met hence the departure of the CMO and his alleged comments on his blog. Perhaps you should ask Bet Butler if the first year instalments for those deals have all been fully paid up and the contracts on a sound footing? You could also ask them if their partnership with Worldlink means they are involved in every deal they do?
That each time the WGP has survived, it has not been good for shareholders so be aware that it is possible for them to restructure and survive whilst we simultaneously lose out. Ask CP22 and SD here. I was surprised to see the subsidiaries in the Insolvency notices as the accounts, interim accounts and funding releases have all been about the corporate identity that is now the Plc. I think the Plc is likely to have no money but be able to hobble along if they have hived off debt elsewhere. However, that is next to useless if ITS goes under with the patents likely in someone else's hands (Administrator will need to maximise proceeds from asset sales and the Plc is unlikely to be the highest bidder) and the Sports sub cannot maintain the Premiership deals if they are indeed lost over the next two weeks. I do not believe the comment that the Plc can fund lots of deals is accurate, I think they have very close to zero unless they have unannounced funds. I would still like to know where Cityboyz etc are getting this information from.
Let's not forget, they are masters of survival and always seem to find a new batch of willing people to buy into them again and shout down the previous set of disenfranchised share owners. We will all move up one level. I will become the new SouthernDude, Breakdance becomes the new Inktomi and some whipper snapper will come in to be the new Jon with the latest teenager speak and profanity. On a serious note, WGP have shown a remarkable ability to surprise even long termers like me. They are not out of this yet.
These types of proceedings are usually petitioned by creditors and not voluntary. There are far easier and less damaging routes for a Company to achieve debt settlements. It is my guess that one or more creditors have petitioned. Reputable investors would also take a very dim view of such a blatant and contrived way to escape bona fide creditors.
It is interesting that the listings in the LG have been around for a week but were only noticed yesterday although I do not doubt the authenticity. For all our collective vigilance, seeing the wood for the trees is still rather difficult for us and those able to provide clarity seem unwilling to do so. I can see the alleged developments from the posts. Has anyone formulated a view on the various posters in question? Before I left for the weekend, some of you had messages outstanding with Worldlink contacts about accounts and relisting timeframes. Did anyone receive an informative reply other than the one stating "will be contacting shareholders shortly".