The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring financial educator and author Jared Dillian has been released. Listen here.
They would still be valid. My holdings are from a private round in 2008. You would probably get diluted but no more so than on the Plc (the £1M nom value shares they can issue). You would not be able to sell of course but would exit in a trade sale. Companies often do better as private organisations then relist with better results i.e. more "actual", less "potential". In fact, a lot of distressed capital investors do exactly that - take companies private, drop in strong management teams, turn them around and relist for big profits. The main downside is that the effect of dilution is not always felt in a public share as you can exit any time but can't in a private. The loan conversions earlier this year did not drastically change the Share Price although the price per share would be lower if an offer came in of course (I speak in general not the issue this year which would have been the same as the debt was disposed of).
What dedication you have to have so much discussion at the weekend on WGP! The response from Mr Riches is odd because the Board is basically him, Crispin and Tony. Are they talking to themselves now or is it an excuse to not have to give any information at a time it no longer suits them? It sounds a little ominous to me. They can take this private without shareholder consent and I have a feeling that is what will happen here especially given the timing of the Listing renewal. If relisting is simply about Accounts and Going Concern, something odd is happening. That is assuming Standard Listings are allowed to manipulate relisting dates as their own discretion.
I agree with M4. The RNS clearly indicates this week. It states not "until week commencing". If it had said not "before", that would be different. The promise is clearly for this week but again, bear in mind they have released an RNS after 17:00 on a Friday before.
Well, they had to pay Paros £150K which was the capped amount they successfully retained (Paros wanted near £1m). The operational run rate is high. The revenue for first half of 2011 was very low (single digit thousands) and expected to continue. They have paid for banner ads at isportsconnect, had to pay fees for the City Index case (even with Conditional Fee arrangement lawyers), need to pay old and new auditors, staff, rent, consultants like Pearson etc plus show they have enough working cap for 12 months to stay listed. And then pay Newcastle, Sunderland and Fulham. What do you think?
I tend to agree with a lot of what you say but not this time. I cannot see how they can possibly have enough money to fund this themselves as well as working capital for the Plc unless they have brought in funds they have not told us about (and you are privy to). We have interim accounts included in the November 2011 prospectus and details of the fund raising since. Perhaps they have successful paid the deposit or first instalment but I cannot see how they can have several hundreds of thousands lying around.
How did they pay the instalments (or total amount) for Newcastle and Sunderland then? Do you have information relating to each of these deals or just Fulham? How come Fulham have not made a statement especially as the news release about appointment WGP is still on their website?
Isn't that part of the Ellis deal which people are saying didn't happen? If they are part of the Ellis deal, the warrants will not have been issued if the investment contract was not executed. I would take WGP warrant prices with a pinch of salt. Some of the converted loans prices were over 90p despite the share price being 15p at the time.
Whilst it looks gloomy and the view of the company is poor, you never know. They might pull the rabbit out of the hat and have a patent settlement with City Index or Bet 365 for all we know. I doubt it but the week isn't over yet.
The RNS that mentioned the holiday issues came out at 15.12 so still time. WGP might return to announcing bad news on a Friday then a positive RNS before open on the Monday. They did that when they announced that there would be no OMT bid but then announced Chryson. Fingers crossed Results come out today, weekend to digest the numbers and then a strong RNS Monday pre-open then unsuspended. Yes M4, I am hedging my bets so I can say "I told you so" no matter what happens!
Actually, it doesn't matter if the Prem deals are all 100% fine or all disasters, that should not be the criteria for relisting. Accounts produced and WGP signed off as a Going Concern for 12 months should be the only thing that matters irrespective of whether the share price hits 1p or £2.50. WGP announced they had initial funding in July if I recall so it may just be clericial work we are waiting for prior to relist.
Bet Butler have been an independent Fulham partner since 2011, before Worldlink. Some time ago, there was a post in here about Bet Butler having "booths" at their stadium and that this might mean the relationship can be extended to the new Worldlink partnership. The Worldlink partnership is for the Official Betting and Gaming Partner. Did the response you got reference "Worldlink" or "Bet Butler"?
The FSA will do you no good. A portfolio needs to be submitted to SFO and a case also raised with HMRC. I am seriously considering doing it if this company does not relist. I have a strong opinion on this company but my own opinion is irrelevant and it is SFO to decide what, if anything, they have done wrong. It is also for SFO to make up their own mind to resource an investigation but they need a potential case presented to them. However, the criteria for an investigation does appear to be met (see SFO website). I have a lot of material going back many years. I'd far rather WGP somehow come good and prove us doubters wrong.