Member Info for johnhume

after AGM approval on 23 May. BIRG can release as it suits them.

hopefully will defer selling until buyback programme commences but big tranche sold between 12th and 17th april.

T4S,
You continue to talk from the side of your mouth- you are well accustomed to it by now.
As regards Neil Catto - being the Group CFO and an Executive Director would you like to explain to the Board how come Boohoo did not release an RNS 6 months ago ( or whenever he was departing per yourself) confirming his departure but released a RNS DAYS AFTER HE HAD DEPARTED. Would this support PwC's assertion they would not touch Boo with a barge pole. Your silence is deafening on this and the replacement auditors.
You quote from Ulmar's twitter release on his departure/resignation and do you seriously suggest/expect him to say anything to the contrary. Is it not true that he was excluded from the Golden Circle and,as a result, you would expect him to have a bee in his nonnet. I certainly would. In fact a prudent/sage MD would make it his business to keep him out of doors.
While a buying Director may not exercise significant managerial control and ,according to you, not material from investor viewpoint, considering the nature of the Boohoo business I would consider the Buying Director to be as influential,if not more so ,than the Sales Director. You may not realise it but the most material aspect from an Investor's viewpoint as regards a company's annual results are the size of earnings/profits and as the dog in the street is aware the chief component of this are costs and the control of costs. I would consider the Buying Director in a clothing/fashion industry a pretty important figure as regards the control of costs.
You make a big issue of Boohoo not requiring a £300mill RCF to keep it afloat. If such is the case why bother availing of the facility and was there not a £6million interest charge in the half year accounts to the 31 August 2022.
"You don't know of any corporate business that ........plan for leadership group". I can assure you they exist in their thousands and they are bigger corporate bodies than your AIM listed Boohoo. I can also state with total confidence that you shall not find a corporate body on this Planet granting a Golden Circle Incentive Plan to the value of £175million when the Capitalised Value of the Company itself is a meagre £660million. ie Incentive Plan equates to 26.5% of the Company's Capital value and YOU WONDER why the Independent Directors Rejected it.
Would you mind clarifying your ignorance when you refer to "wrt results ...there were about 6 weeks trading left at quieter time of year ". My sole reference to results was in respect of looking forward to their release n 16 May ,maybe being a day to remember for shareholders besides the media.
In future do the Board a favour with less speaking from side of the mouth and more front of the mouth truth.

34% interest in PLT to Boohoo

T4S,
In previous post said you were a beaut -will amend this one who speaks from the side of his mouth
.Per Boohoo RNS dated 3 April 2023 it states -" w/e/f 31 March 2023 Neil Catto stepped down as executive Director after nearly 12 years with the Group, majority as CFO and instrumental in building the Group from single Brand to multi Brand platform. What I find very significant about this RNS is that it is dated some days AFTER Neil Catto has left. I can well understand how PwC ran for cover , distancing themselves from Boohoo, if this is how their business is done. It also indicates to me that this departure may not have been amicable.
Umar Karmani has also left and as he has disposed of his 34% interest in Boohoo there is no incentive for him to hang around.IF he is hanging around he would be considered a liability as he NOW has no interest in the company.
In your opinion J Ingham , Buying Director of Debenham's, is a non entity. If so ,where does that put the remainder of the staff. Mind you you were singing from the roof tops when Boo acquired Debenhams.
That to me spells 3 people have left Boohoo on 31 March 2023, voluntarily or otherwise. That is factual and not troll talk.
Imo all is not well in the Boohoo camp ;
- 3 executives departed amid you could say a communications breakdown. That word comms again.
- A golden circle award scheme which has lost the support of the shareholders. Interesting comment that U Kamani not
part of circle which may have contributed to his departure and some believe his "hanging about" is a blessing !!
- A leading top 4 Accountancy firm resigning and not prepared to touch Boohoo with a barge pole. To ascertain the
whereabouts of their replacement firm better check the Golden Pages.
- Change of R/O .
Really looking forward to release of financial results on 16 May - may well be a day to remember not only for s/h but media also.
caveat emptor

13 April BIRG notified of Blackrock increasing their holding from 9.05% to 9.08%.
18 April BIRG notified of Blackrock reducing their holding from 9.08% to 9.01%.
Best keep a watch on this . If B'Rock exiting this sp will be retreating.

Grimreaper,
Why are you guys getting so upset ? I have related to the following FACTS ;
.The simultaneous departure/resignation of 3 key executives. Anyone who does not believe this to be of potential significance is delusional and living in cloud cuckoo land. It MAY be nothing or it may be hugely significant. Time will tell
but any potential investor who ignores it is gambling and not investing.
Great credence was put on ONS figures and alleged sales growth. 1st Parag states sales increase of 1.2% in Jan and 0.9% in Feb and then goes on to state a 3.5% fall in sales vis a vis same 3 months of previous year.
PwC literally ran from office 2 years ago, crying foul and not wanting to be associated in ANY way with Boohoo. How are their successors faring and what credibility do they carry ?
What are the tailwinds currently attaching to Boo as I would love to know -may decide to buy back in.
Majority of independent shareholders voted against recent Golden Circle Proposal. Never a good idea when you have not majority shareholders behind you. May not bother you but very important to professional investor. Being the AIM I suppose more suited to gamblers than Investors.

Level5
what are the tailwinds ?

T4S,
There is no name calling here - quite simply adopting a more accurate user name than T4G -simple as. Being into accuracy I am quite sure you will appreciate this.
So you are of the opinion that being buying Director for Debenham's is unimportant in the Boohoo scheme of things.
I am of the opinion that Lightening does not strike twice - never mind 3 times. You may put whatever spin you wish on 3 SIMULTANEOUS departures/resignations to suit your agenda but I am skeptical to say the least. There may be more to the results than simple figures and there may be more interest in what is not said than what is said ie reading between the lines. If figures disappoint, taken with 3 simultaneous departures/resignations, then Brokers TPs may be optimistic as the rumour machine goes into overdrive. Also bear in mind that Boohoo are not exactly the media flavour of the month and not likely to be in the forseeable future. Add in over 55% disgruntled shareholders and you have all the ingredients of an interesting month/s ahead. Hard to see any tail winds.
Sorry if this disappoints the rampers but I am open to an alternative interpretation which I have yet to receive.

T4S,
You really are a beaut - " why do these people continuously post ...". NOBODY on this Board posts as many as 50% of your postings. You pontificate such rubbish so regularly you invite responses, even if in kind. You are so blinkered you would be better off getting ready for the Donkey Derby in Epsom !
As regards predictions,there is no soothsayer on here so one forms their own opinion which one is entitled to change dependent on news etc. This is what I did , got in at 38p made 45% and moved on ,perhaps temporarily. I may decide to buy back in, dependent on sp and interpretation of events such as resignations of Catto, Kamani jnr and the female marketing executive. The question has to be raised how/why 3 such key resignations occurred within 2 weeks of each other. To me this goes beyond sheer coincidence.
The upcoming results could be the most important for the company for a number of years and ,if not satisfactory, those Brokers TPs of 35/36 may well be fulfilled as poor results will/may be linked to the 3 executive departures. The question is were they pushed or did they leave voluntarily. Leaving voluntarily may indicate a sinking ship.
This is not troll talk - simply interpreting recent events.

@Reardon95
did a female marketing Director not also resign in last few weeks in addition to Catto and Kamani Jnr.
Has there been any reaction to the appointment of PKF Littlejohn to replace PwC - I appreciate this occured over 2 years ago but PwC walking at that time created more than ripples.
The Brokers TPs at present don't look encouraging -Numis = 35 -Berenberg @45 -Liberium@35 -Deutsche @36 -Barclays @ 37.
As you say upcoming results better be promising.

strong results today from B of America, JPM,Chase.

T4S,
seeing you are on this site 24/7 do you not think you could spend your time more profitably - say writing a fictional novel.

T4S,
"If debt finance so widely available why so many firms are unable to secure it "
The day of the free lunch is long gone. So you imply that the company unable to secure debt finance shall have the pleasure of the equity horse riding to the rescue.almost as good as your troll nonsense.
Will be interesting to see what happens if Boo have to raise equity finance in the future.Vast majority of investors avoid the AIM playground and have no doubt the treatment of existing S/H will be noted. Maybe the discount will be sufficiently attractive to bring them on board.

T4S,
True to form you resort to the "troll" etc methodology, being unable to contribute constructively or intelligently to the discussion.I also wish to remind you I haven't adopted any name calling, using T4S rather than T4G as your user name,simply as I consider it more accurate. I also have not displayed the ignorance of referring to anyone's Nationality and perhaps you might explain to the Board the necessity of doing so as it totally irrelevant to this or any discussion.
However, your silence is DEAFENING on the following which IS VERY RELEVANT to the discussion.
1. The contradictions set out in your beloved ONS survey - namely a rise of 1.2% in Jan sales, 0.9% in Feb sales but then
goes on refer to a fall of 3.5% in the 3 month period vis a vis the previous year.
2. The fact that SD raised their finance by means of equity may be more profitable to them rather than debt due primarily
to their small shareholding base. To state they cannot raise the finance by means of debt ,without knowing the facts, is
a serious/dangerous and misguided statement to make. As already posted , if you cannot raise the debt you will not
raise the equity - only exceptions being private companies and public companies facing liquidation/closure when s/h
have no option but to contribute to keep it afloat and hopefully avoid losing their existing capital
3. Boo raised their finance by means of debt rather than equity primarily I believe because the golden circle did not wish
to see their existing s/h being halved and subsequently possibly losing control of the company. The subsequent 175mill
golden proposal reinforces that point as they have no interest in the Independent S/Hs. This is further supported by the
fact that the details of the RCF was never put to them for their consideration/approval.
4.You imply you know the RCF terms -how about sharing them with the Board.
If an independent rational person stands back and study the bigger picture over the last 2 years and considers events such as
- well publicissed "s/trader" treatment of staff being paid well below the minimum statutory level.
- shareholder treatment in their being ignored on the RCF facilty and the £175million golden circle proposal as the
majority of the independent shareholders rejected the proposal.
-SP falling from 380/400p to 31p in little over 2 year period.
-a company operating in the most labour intensive of businesses who dont appear to give a toss about the very people
who "manufacture" their profits. These are the very people whose productivity should be encouraged and the BOD
appear to be putting the cart before the horse.
-a company who now rely on independent shareholders to finance their expansion and how do they treat them ??
Perhaps the hypothetical investor needs a rethink.

Grimreaper
Any possibility of educating the Board with some informed comment , together with illustrating the supposed garbage.
ps
dont forget the valium.

T4S,
Firstly, what has an individual's NATIONALITY got to do with investment or the discussion on here. You are simply exposing yourself to be termed a ****** in addition to supreme ignorance. Probably goes with the territory when you forgot the meaning of T4S ,nothwithstanding you being in convulsions over it 2 weeks before.
Secondly ;As regards being univested, I invested £7600 few months ago and walked away with £11,100 couple of weeks ago and so am very content with my 45% gain,so content would love to realise similar gain in the future,hence my interest in the board.
"So you have nothing to say about SD having a Balance Sheet that is too weak to secure Debt Finance "
My dear Chappie (T4S) you have again confirmed my opinion about your non stop cackle amounting to bu...t ,hence your "user name" You do not appear to realise that ALL COMPANIES have the option of raising finance by means of Debt or Equity,the choice adopted shall ( should) be in the best financial interests of the company. As this discussion has unfolded it appears that SD chose equity whilst BOO choose the debt route. My half penny's worth on this discussion amounts to the following ;
1. As posted already credit facilities are available to all - the credit terms will be determined by the financial clout of the
seeking company - sole caveat being "you cannot flog dead horses".
2.If a Company's Balance Sheet is too weak to secure debt finance,it is too weak to secure equity finance in the sense
that professional investors shall not invest . This may not apply to private companies where different interests apply.
3. SD having a shareholder base of only 82million shares considered the equity option preferable to debt. I have little
doubt but they considered the debt option and adopted the equity option as best for the company,relativ smal s/h.
4. Boohoo having a shareholder base of c 1.28Billion shares considered the debt option preferable to equity for reasons
already posted ,the most obvious being that it would be unacceptable to shareholders, especially the Golden Circle as
they would be looking at a halving of their shareholding interest and possible control of the company. However it was
never put to the shareholders !My view on this substantiated by the 175mill proposal.
You have given Pp1 a lecture on nett assets, unencumbered assets etc. I found this particularly interesting as you do not appear capable of distinguishing between Nett Loss and Profit before Tax/Profit after Tax/ or something else.
I have also asked you to advise the Board on the contents of the Boo RCF as you indicated you are aware of the terms.
You lectured Pp1 and others on the contents ONS survey and ridiculing the BRC survey. However, when I asked you to comment on the contradictions served up in the 1st paragraph of the ONS not only did you not reply the post was removed ( on instructions of whom ?). For your benefit (and the Board) it stated an increase of

as already posted credit facilities are available to all and sundry. The financial strength of the company will determime on what terms credit facilities are obtained.
Securing 300mill by way of equity finance results in a sp of 28/9p assuming issue of additional 1 bill shares which means incoming investors would probably demand sp being in the region of 25p to invest.
I would not call that academic, certainly not to existing investors.

where is the analogy ?
10.01. you book a flight to Grand Canaria.
10.02. you book a flight to Tenerife.
result= A.

" ...even less of responding to it ".
SO WHY RESPOND TO IT AS PER YOUR 18.24 POST.
IDIOT.