Member Info for Jonno41

I won't join either - there has not been anything to suggest the BOD are not doing their best for shareholders, they have not held back information or done anything other than I would have expected them to do (perhaps with Dicker's performance as an exception).

I am just about 99% sure the group will not impact what happens here, and 100% sure it will be an extra burden on the BOD which they do not need right now.

Maverick - look at one of you other holdings Hurincane enrgy, the board had no skin in the game, gave terible updates, withheld vital information and are now screwing shareholders to pay back bondholders, compare that to Amigo who have skin in the game , came up with a good enough scheme to not be opposed by the FCA, then too many members of this board started bragging about their holdings (the "would be" millionaires), causing the likes of debt camel and MP's to lobby the FCA , which was definetly one of the major factors in their intervention.

You are now making the same mistake again - stay quiet and let the board do thier job - I am sure it will increase your odds of a good outcome, the less "activist" you become.

Thanks for sharing this - would you also be able to share the questions?

Someone on here said no FS companies are valued on EBIT - total crap

Also senator - it is ludicrous to group all financial services companies together , anyone who understand financial services companies will realise the listed ones come in many forms and some of them has generate their earnings from commission and fees - these companies can be valued using EBITDA - so please stop being so arrogant

I said loan tech not fin tech - just has a platform in other words - Amigo 2.0 is probably an improved platform as well as improved products

I own a Financial services company and all valuations I have had are based on EBITDA and then other factors - it not loan related so this might be the difference- I am a broker - so very different to Amigo

Senator - Amigo is a loan tech company- I’d value it as least at 20x EBITDA - based on first hand conversations I have had with buyers of similar companies - lots of interest from the US in particular- can you give me an example of the much lower valuations you are suggesting- not disbelieving you as I am referring to loan lead gen rather than lenders - just surprised

The great thing about financial services companies , is when they have a business model that works - it keeps working - which is one reason why they get high valuations - claims broke Amigos model - fix that with a scheme and they have a working model again - making the risk of failure small - so borrowing once a scheme is in place should be relatively easy if needed to meet bondholders deadlines

Surely a successful Amigo with a scheme in place would be able to borrow before 2024 if they were short?

SOA 2.0 is looking likely now - only question is - how much more will it impact shareholders?? If its only more profit or a min pence in the poiunt threshold - however long it take - this would be great news... Any debt for Equity/Equity for creditors dilution - no so great- but the point has been proven, the only way to get value from shareholders is to agree a scheme which does not wipe them out - if you try and wipe them lout, the price will be so low, you'll get much more from profits.....

But, as soon as a new scheme process is announced - Boom - big time - I hope :)

Who's to say it was in Amigo's benefit to win the sanction hearing, the FCA could have said, if you win, we'll derugulate you and slap on a hefty fine for misselling. if you resubmit a new SOA we are able to approve (or not oppose) we'll work with you to approve new lending criteria and Amigo 2.0. and lift the VREQ as soon as the scheme is sanctioned

A bit far fetched to suggest we did not want to win the case, but the sanctioning to me was not the end of Amigo's troubles as the FCA still would have had the upper hand. I appreciate their powers are limited but I am sure they could of made life diffcult for Amigo

I think SOA2 will be proposed and approved, I would not be surprised if there was not some sort of agreement in principle in palce with Amogo and the FCA before the last hearing.

Not sure if this has been discussed but the risk is clearly - what will SOA 2 be and what impact will it have on shareholders.

I think Amigo has proved the lack of value in the share price should an SOA not be approved so hopefully the FCA will see the best opportunity to make shareholders pay will be in the form of dividends rather than dilution. But the FCA might insist on some sort of dilution that the makret does not like.

Saying that, it is hard not be cautiaus after the last few weeks so unless perusaded otherwise.

GLA

How would that make the FCA look? All customers and FOS get nada?? I think if insolvency was likely we would have an rns that said Amigo will appeal and if it fails insolvency will follow

Not one that says they are looking at a new scheme - this is good news unless the news scheme is bad for shareholders

This is a good RNS - we know insolvency is going to happen if there is no scheme - plus mentioning administration keeps the price down which is crucial for a new scheme approval - we know they have to work with the FCA to come up with a scheme they will not oppose and an appeal might of given us a bounce - but there has to be grounds for an appeal

As for the secured note holders - bearing in mind how Amigo should bounce back with a scheme it seems unlikely they will not show some flexibility to them if required

Sounds like classic customer services trying to say the right thing to get the customer off the phone even if it does not bear any truth!

This is probably MIC selling, possibly Bybrook or JPM buying but difficult to say after recent news.

Does anoyone know - would Amigo be able to appeal the sanction with an improved deal for the customers, or if they change the deal would they need to go back to stage 1 (court approval, vote, sanctioning)?

Obviously from a timing perspective, option 1 would be weeks and option2 wpould be months.

Senator, no need to rubbish my ideas, we have varying knowledge on these boards, so if I have a thought that is not a possibility, please do point that out, without telling me I am talking rubbish, this is after all a pretty specialist subject.

Thanks

Senator, I agree the 15% until all claims are paid would be a good solution. Sorry, why would a RI at some point in the future as a percentage of Mccap be rubbish? Not my area of expertise but I thought it would be a good way of making shareholders contribute, when the company could digest a RI rather than now, where it clearly cannot?

Or commit to a rights issue in 2 years time? And put those funds into the scheme?

As Vinson mentions, another option is or Amigo to buy shares now, keep them in bond and Amigo sell them and adds the funds to the scheme when the shareprice hits a certain price, works the same way as a rights issue, but would actually be better for shareholders.

The problem with other options like a debt for Equity swap, is the lack of Equity (which is why Amigo trashed its share price by brining it out of suspension before the ruling) - what could you raise - £40M tops - I think Amigo could go further and offer a RI in 3 years time for the equivelent value of today Mccap and put that straight in the fund. That way, no jobs are lost, shareholder do not lose out anymore than we already have, creditors are paid and the redress customer get an extra £50M

Add profits and 10p become more like 50p in total, assuming we make a profit - look at the share price over this entire period and shareholder have average much less that 50p in the pound... so that would make the scheme fair.

DYOR