Member Info for KNIGELK

It's strange certain posters appear at the same time but at least one loser is filtered. You can post anywhere mate, but if you mention another share that you have traded, I would at least think you would post on it and discuss it. Otherwise not discussing your investments on a discussion website seems like going into a share blind, almost like gambling :-)
Why you only post here is up to you. There's thousands of threads to look at. You might find a new investment. I have many times. I will try not to post here now unless there is news and any future digs will be reported. This share is dead. Move on!! (as you have been telling others)

Lol you really need to get a life. Apparently been trading Saga, yet you didn't post there. LSE members tend to post on shar s they hold-held-or may invest in. Just saying. As for Debenhams it's still trading but good luck to the hedge funds now owning it - they will need it :-)

Very active yesterday, I do sometimes wonder if an investor has so many questions whether they should be buying into the share - CLP/Brainspark has always been a complex affair!

My own actions? I traded the share and sold out before D-day ok? Rather than the childish constant digs (why?) perhaps the focus s/b on the directors who doubled the debt, said the company was a going concern in the last AR and delisted the share to stop MA causing fiction as the largest shareholder rather than attack shareholders who traded a £1.8 billion pa turnover company and called it wrong. Jezz you keep attacking the wrong people - it's as if the directors/lenders are posting here!!!

The only guy with an ego is the poster who never held here long or short but continues to post in a delisted share. It doesn't bother me if MA takes legal action or not - as I kept saying, people were trading the share based on an ultra low share price (remember it doubled in a day) and the fact SPD were mulling over a bid. It's worse because the company continues while shareholders were wiped out. Btw I presume you agree the shorters were gamblers too? They were taking the same risk - actually a bigger risk because I believe their losses can be unlimited. We don't need anyone telling us what to do with our money but if anyone ONLY invested in this share and nowhere else, I agree, that's gambling.
Now stop the digs or expect the report button to be used
regularly thanks....

The only guy with an ego is the poster who never held here long or short but continues to post in a delisted share. It doesn't bother me if MA takes legal action or not - as I kept saying, people were trading the share based on an ultra low share price (remember it doubled in a day) and the fact SPD were mulling over a bid. It's worse because the company continues while shareholders were wiped out. Btw I presume you agree the shorters were gamblers too? They were taking the same risk - actually a bigger risk because I believe their losses can be unlimited. We don't need anyone telling us what to do with our money but if anyone ONLY invested in this share and nowhere else, I agree, that's gambling.
Now stop the digs or expect the report button to be used
regularly thanks....

The only guy with an ego is the poster who never held here long or short but continues to post in a delisted share. It doesn't bother me if MA takes legal action or not - as I kept saying, people were trading the share based on an ultra low share price (remember it doubled in a day) and the fact SPD were mulling over a bid. It's worse because the company continues while shareholders were wiped out. Btw I presume you agree the shorters were gamblers too? They were taking the same risk - actually a bigger risk because I believe their losses can be unlimited. We don't need anyone telling us what to do with our money but if anyone ONLY invested in this share and nowhere else, I agree, that's gambling.
Now stop the digs or expect the report button to be used
regularly thanks....

Nice to know you like to stalk other posters holdings whilst just posting yourself on one ex share you never held pmsl. Btw answer the point. Directors held shares here. The ex CEO acquired shares just a few months ago. So if the guy at the top is gambling what chance does the company have? Mike Ashley is a billionaire - he gambled here.... As for my AIM investments, k can afford the odd risk after making a fortune with Helphire 6-7 years ago. Goodbye as unless share related news happens I will not lost here again and leave you sad individual to talk to yourself :-)

Well know we know... you ONLY post on this ONE thread because you are interested in the psychological behaviour of some investors - grow up. Every week shares go into suspension - every week shares are delisted or have profit warnings - yet you just pick up on Debenhams. Every month a share has a shock - CAKE or PV for example when a black hole is found in the accounts - is that the shareholders fault ..if I only knew indeed. It's not gambling but its definitely high risk - Pearls and others knew the risks involved and his/her only error was to take MA/SPD word for it when they said they were planning a 5p bid and subsequently were planning court action. If only we knew...
As for the directors - some like Sergio were also shareholders!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Were they gambling too? Or did they know whatever happen they would keep their cosy jobs while thousands of employees worried about their future post CVA. Disgraceful. The nerve of this guy to even write an article in a national newspaper - as if he has forgotten the misinformation to shareholders - the shareholders destruction over two years - the cosy agreement with lenders a year before the bonds expired. My only interest - as someone who held shares here and work in the retail sector is that directors stop getting away with this and actually lose their jobs on failure. Failure to their shareholders !!!!

I note that the CEO was in the Mail of Sunday yesterday about his plans for Debenhams. Reducing the size of another 20-30 shops - converting some to multi use ie. cinemas - move more online - not sure I read an apology to shareholders - perhaps he wasn't one....?

Of course the company will be in financial trouble IF it only has cash for the next six months. Is it still a going concern without a fund raise? Btw I posted at 0.4p ... at 4p too. .

Well I accept - especially during the last few weeks before delisting - that Debenhams had become "a gamble".. personally that's why I only traded small amounts on and off... the issue really is "some" shareholders rightly or wrongly took MA at his word and expected a bid so hung on for a possible 100% profit to 5p. It never happen so he has some explanation to do like other parties imho

Last point - this case was unique... the major shareholder made countless offers including cash injections and various ways that the company could remain listed - no wonder he is considering the legal route - personally I doubt he would be successful in any venture...

I couldn't be clearer - anyone can post anywhere BUT why post just to have a go at a shareholder who is still trying to look for any positives. How would YOU feel if you had invested £20k (say) in a company and suddenly it got suspended - whether it was high risk or a company that appeared safe - you probably would be annoyed at your loss especially if the company continued trading. That's my point - IF Pearls wishes to post links on possible developments for ex shareholders - I really don't understand why non holders wish to attack him - except for the odd shorter who keeps posting ...

Guys, you don't need to read or post on the thread, especially if you have already made up your minds!! Pearls, has every right to wait and see if MA takes any action. If not, I think even Pearls will admit it's game over re any hope for ex shareholders. I'm interested in whether Debenhams still has a long term future. If the likes of Boots are considering a CVA then it's really game over for the entire high street within five years imho

When I can't help if you are not wise enough to understand my point :-)
Let me say it another way - no poster on here is about to take legal action against the company or advisers - so we can have our opinions but it will not change anything. SPD/MA have stated they might go down the legal route - they do have the cash to go to the courts - personally I doubt they will - but watch this space

LOL yesterday you said everyone had disappeared..now everyone had appeared! Make your mind up.
Unless there is a RNS today/tomorrow, the yesterday was obviously a P&D attempt... I actually hope I am wrong about this view

Pearls, I guess a CVA might help with reducing rents/stores and future overheads - but has nothing to do with reducing the existing debt. The company could not continue with a £500 million debt pile so the BoD obviously thought it was the priority and a CVA could happen once the debt issue was resolved

Never mind a BB poster, it also seems to be the view of the ex 29.8% shareholder and billionaire businessman. Whether he believes it enough to go down the legal route is another matter

Some of us don't need to post 24/7 or just on one thread ... but glad to see a rise - for whatever reason