Member Info for Kando

Let's hope so raghusn. By the sound of it the company were eager to secure the bid (and modifications/first tranch of cash injection) by Monday. It still seems plausible even if the FCA investigation surely won't have improved those odds.

It's cute you think you've been "holding your nerve". The resident hysteric for 4 months.

Remind us all again how your AGM coup went?

"What makes you so scared to say no thanks?"

Saying no thanks to a takeover is saying yes please to a dilutive rights issue, or worse.

Take your blinkers off.

I don't borrow to invest. I invest to make money.

You apparently invest to wish your investments away on a justice crusade.

As one of your acolytes keeps saying, you'd "rather see Would [sic] burn, than sell it to Sidara for 35p".

If you held this share for another 10 years you'd only lose money. As everyone has done who has held it for the last 10 years. You're just the next willing bagholder for someone else.

It probably will be a sideshow raghusn, an unwelcome one. The average length of an FCA investigation is 42 months. The urgency of recapitalization is clearly less than 42 months. Wood needs recapitalization soon, either via a sale (preferred by the board) or a rights issue or d4e, since simply borrowing more is clearly off the table. An ongoing FCA investigation isn't going to make the terms of any recapitalization any more favourable for holders. It's yet another reason to discount the value of the business in a sale scenario and it drags the share price down further in a rights issue scenario.

"Hope you didn’t already spend the “winnings” on a summer cruise. Might want to check if it’s refundable."

You're invested here too dipsht.

The more you talk, the more you sound dumber than a bag of rocks.

Ice now signing up for new accounts to agree with his own insanity. Presume he likes sniffing his own flatulence as well.

"I never said a deal legally could go through without accounts. I said the investigation makes it practically impossible now."

If that's so then Wood is cooked and shareholders are stuffed.

Perhaps you, Woody and Gonzo can pool together to take my shares off me then. If this is such great news to be investigated by the FCA, while suspended from trading, while needing to recapitalize the business, while needing to renegotiate a maturing debt mountain, while trying to sell the company. If it's great news that you think Sidara can't now bid. Buy my shares off me and profit from this great news.

Gonzo and woody, you've been calling for an FCA investigation into a company you are long...?

You both need your heads checked. How does this help your investments you turkeys.

How can you be so deluded to call an FCA investigation good news...

At best this is years of investigation dragging on, a hefty fine of probably ~£10m at the end of it, and makes trying to recapitalize and/or sell the company, and renegotiate their maturing debt pile - all of which they're desperately trying to do, even harder.

Really rotten RNS. Just the worst timing with the PUSU deadline, debt waivers expiring and the bid reportedly so close to being a done deal. If this spooks Sidara and/or other bidders, Wood has problems.

Yeah, honestly, how there is clique of you who find Icecool anything less than insufferable is wild. You see his emojis and sweeping misunderstanding of markets and corporate finances and think, yes, I like the cut of that man's hysteria? Do you all play in the same darts league or something?

"You’ve convinced yourself Wood must sell because you want them to."

Or... we've all been told - by the company - that they must sell. It's been made very clear that the sale is considered the least worst way to recapitalize the business, which the company has made very clear it needs. It's got nothing to do with what James, or anyone else wants them to do. You're still far too emotional.

Good post Mark. Well summarized.

So that's a no then, Ice? More of the same. No interest in talking about your "facts" or attempts to justify them. Just more emotions, anger, accusation and more emojis.

Every time I'm silly enough to engage with you I"m reminded of Mark Twain's "Never argue with..." quote, but I give you the benefit of the doubt that eventually reason might ultimately prevail, at least to try to stop you hijacking the board for yet another day with your alt-history fantasy roleplay. I always regret it.

Is it possible you try to debate in good faith, just for novelties sake. And you reply to the points made to you.

You still don't accept there were profit warnings rnsed, you still don't accept the company has rnsed that its capital structure is weak and needs recapitalization, you still don't accept that covenants were breached and waivers required, which were rnsed, you didn't reply to the last point about waivers expiring and PUSU deadline aligning. You're obsessed with requiring an rns, that you've had, but you don't believe, and I'm sure we'd all like to understand why you don't think what they said was what they said and what it all means is what it means.

Instead all your posts are emotional, wailing about what you accuse everyone else of WANTING, and instead how they should WANT what you WANT. When the market cares little what any of us want, but what is reality and what is likely. What you want is irrelevant. What any PI here wants is no less irrelevant. It's what the financial situation of the company is today, what its lenders think, and increasingly (given it's been rnsed to us that all other forms of recapitalization are worse outcomes) what a buyer is willing to value it - Sidara or anyone else.

Your other hand-waving and glossing over aside, the fact that waivers were extended until June 30th, and the company and Sidara only extended the PUSU deadline to exactly and no further than the 30th (shorter than they could have applied for) rings no alarm bells for you, whatsoever?

Everyone else might understandably read that as lenders being reluctant to extend the waivers any further and pressing both parties to hurry along the takeover process and proposed concomitant liquidity injection. Even if that means the bid is formalized and debt modifications made prior to the audited accounts. Which is what sounds like is about to happen per the Sky article.

"No lender’s gonna assess covenant compliance without the final numbers. 👍"

You're painfully naive if you think the lenders haven't already long been given sight of the unaudited accounts. They will have known the extent of the prior year restatements required and pursuant covenant breaches as soon as the Deloitte Review concluded.

But again, this will not sit well with you IceCool, you'll deny it because it's not been spelled out to you with emojis. Garbage in, garbage out.

"then show me the rns that says wood breached covenants, is insolvent, or cash flow is currently critical."

you've had them posted verbatim to you, and explained to you, by more people than just me, many times. the rnses are available for you to read.

you simply choose to gloss over, or deliberately misinterpret what the company have told you. you are so hopelessly stuck in your bot-like hallucination, and no one can help you escape it but you.

i think you struggle because corporate jargon doesn't use the explicit words "profit warning" "liquidity crisis" "we breached debt covenants, woops". so you say they never told you. you say they've officially said none of that. but they officially have, in the terms that market communications use.

they rnsed on feb 14th a profit warning, guiding to missing in fcf guidance, downgrading it from positive to negative 150-200m.

they then rnsed that they applied for waivers for expected covenant breaches relating to the review, and then extended them, after the findings of the review - so they officially broke them, or why would they need to extend them... they extended them, so they broke them.

they have rnsed that their "capital structure is not where they want it to be" and they need to "explore all options for recapitalizing the business" up to and including a sale of the business - that transparently means they have a cash issues.

it upsets you to read this, so to protect your fragile ego, you refuse it. you want them to do an amateur-hour rns with emojis and "we dun ****ed up this is a profit warning, we broke our debt covenants and lenders are pressuring us" to spell it out to you so that you can understand it in your own language. but to everyone else, they have already spelled it out. you just have no interest in listening.

"Nothing official actually points to that being the case though."

It absolutely does, but you prefer to bury your head in the sand. Nothing goes in. You don't believe anything that's been RNSed to you.

You might as well be a bot, Ice. You seem to suffer from one large intractable AI hallucination. Nothing seems to go in. Just like ChatGPT couldn't count how many R's are in the word Strawberry, you can't grasp why seeing the audited accounts before the company needs recapitalization might not be a plausible timeline. Nothing goes in, only emojis come out. Garbage in, garbage out. The Icecool way.

"I’ve said the same thing from day one, don’t recommend or push a vote on a deal until the audited accounts are actually published. That’s it. End of. Not unaudited. Not partial. Not “trust us, we’ve seen them.” FULL. AUDITED. ACCOUNTS"

Why do you struggle so with the idea that the company finances may not align with the timeline of the audit?

You'd rather see the company become insolvent and administrators bought in waiting on seeing the audited accounts? You'd rather get diluted in a rights issue (incidentally, also without seeing the accounts and having no vote or say on it)? You'd rather have the lenders take your equity?

All these things are potential alternatives to refusing a sale before the audit is complete.

If the audit - for arguments sake because we don't know - takes another 8 months, and the company has - again for arguments sake because we don't know - the liquidity to keep functioning for 3 months. Then you have to raise capital in those 3 months. If you run out of money or lenders pull the plug in 3 months, you can't say, hold on chaps, we promise we'll accept Sidara's liquidity/rescue in 8 months, just loan us 5 more months worth of cash please, even though we're now ostensibly insolvent and have form with breaking debt covenants... because this one guy who uses a lot of emojis on a retail investor forum NEEDS to see the AUDITED accounts before he'll let anyone vote on it.

Get real.