Member Info for KNIGELK

..and this is your very first post! Yeah right...

Do.you actually read his posts. A number have been removed. The likes of "this is going bust!! LOL!!!". You might call it posting. I call it trolling and offensive and I will continue to report any insensitive post and ask others to do the same. I think some forget that jobs and people's investment money is at sake here so I just ask it's kept civil

For once it's you who has it wrong. My post was directed 100% to LSE2000.

We know what the main parties priorities are before voting at a general election although of course there are surprises in budgets. You vote Labour for more spending/borrowing/tax rises for the rich and you vote Tory for tax cuts/less borrowing and perhaps less spending overall - i am being general. Cameron decided on a referendum - parliament agreed and said it would carry out the instructions of the British people - we decided for our "petty" reasons which way to vote - and parliament also triggered A50. So carry out the verdict of the people and leave the EU. If we do not - then it will be the first time this country has not carried out the result of a referendum. I am quite prepared to accept another referendum following leaving the EU but we really should leave first imho. BTW it doesn't help that so many MPs voted/want remain in areas that voted leave - MPs do not always reflect what their voters want.

If you are sure this company will be bust - may i suggest you have now made your point and there's no point you posting here? This is a debating/discussion website were I hope ALL posters are capable of listening to one another and capable of perhaps reviewing/changing their opinion. What is known - and i am fed up of saying it - is that the company - as far as we are aware - still makes an underlying PROFIT. If it was an underlying loss in excess of £50 million then i would agree with you. There is debt headroom. There is a plan. Indeed actually read the AR and note the point by point measures the company has/will take to attempt to turn this around. The company has a decent and growing online business (btw I will tell you what is dire - waiting two weeks for a new debit card thanks to Amazon clogging up our postal service!!!!). It's not all good (of course) but I contest that it is all bad either. It's a well known brand and who knows - maybe our overseas business is performing well too? I think their "12 days of Christmas" promotion is fantasic - and is encouraging me to go their to shop. Lets see how Christmas pans out before calling for the fat lady. Last point - MA should get his own house in order and sort out HoF/SD/Evans issues before even considering taking on about massive brand

One last point. Perhaps asked why people voted to leave? No reasons I can think of 1) FoA was agreed by all three main parties - whether right or wrong people didn't have a say as UKIP was never going to get into power. 2) We never had referendums on the Treaties which changed membership to the common market to the political state known as the EU . Resentment and anger built up over time and a small majority who voted decided they had enough and voted out. Yes the young are the most effected (depends on what you mean by young) but remember older people have the experience of time and didn't appreciate the changes to the country over the last 20-30 years and wanted out. Trouble is you can't reverse the clock and half of migration is non EU. Politicians need to listen to their people otherwise this site will continue for decades whether we decide to leave it somehow decide to stay...

. their portfolio needs to reduce by up to fifty stores. Hasn't this issue been around since the private ownership days? I presume only a handful of store leases are near the max 25-30 year lease period with most between 10-20 years remaining. My point is that maybe it's not as dire as some believe nor an issue that can be ignored. I accept a CVA might happen I just don't think it's a cert

Of course a portion of the portfolio is toxic - if the word is appropriate. Just as a portion of the portfolio have leases due to end in the next 5-10 years. Just as Debenhams have decided tgei

Action is due against a Mr Stevenson. No update on whether it will take place. Only other current expected news is update on Worthington re liquidators report? Other court cases on TI have been mentioned on the AE blog but not confirmed to my knowledge. .

Agree, sadly most live on their mobiles now (look at the moaning when O2 went down yesterday) and don't go outside to shop or even talk directly to people. It's the direction of travel. So longer term Debenhams probably need half their revenue from online and keep a portfolio of key location flagship stores. This will be the same for most brands but at least some of us will continue to shop on the high street even if it now is mostly bookmakers, coffee and charity shops :-(

Will you stop with you flip flop posts? Why should a company that been on the FTSE for years and continues to trade, delist? Were's the logic?

Of course, proactive shareholders went to the mobile steam .com website and read the AGM notice. I would have gone but was in London yesterday not today. Btw just one director is paid too much . The others are paid around the £10k level. Some initial buying this morning suggests maybe the AGM went well. Who knows but at least the next time there is an agreement RNS the p&d traders will not pile in.

There will be more exceptionals for a while, I just hope not as material. Any future goodwill write off will be smaller and ditto onerous leases. Agree a lot of risks.. fyi my hope is high street sales stabile and Debenhams sales remain static due to a higher proportion coming from their online operation. Debenhams also hold a number of store franchises overseas so not all focused on Norway although, yes, profits will be down to sub £10 million if it is sold presuming.no further cost cutting will feed though to the bottom line .

The misleading posts are unbelievable. Are some here working for the shorters/MA? I repeat, they make an underlying profit. Think of it another way.. if profits can fall from £150 million to £33 million in a matter of 2-3 years ... is it not feasible they can turn this around and return to decent profits just as quick? Many retailers have had bad periods and bounced back Inc supermarkets. (Ditto banks, builders etc ) it's a cycle and we are near the bottom. Wages are starting to recover ... Brexit will be sorted one way or the other soon. Loss making stores will be closed . Be positive! You will have a better life.

Now at a sharp discount to current NAV. If bondholders want to exchange at a 80% discount and then sell out at historic lows, that is up to them...

I do love the fact that some are only capable of discussing this one option which has not happen and may not happen. It's as if they need/want it to happen. As I said recently, most costs increase year on year. Salaries, business rates, heating, cleaning, rent (!), advertising, consultants and goods for sale. Some of these costs can be managed or cut while others cannot. It's about revenue and margins. Rent is a large slice of the cost cake but in itself should not mean the company can justify a CVA without receiving all costs first and taking cut cutting measures. A CVA may happen eventually . I just don't see it any time soon. Not under this CEO. Discussion really needs to move on to what other measures can be taken, Christmas trading (busy last night in Oxford Street) and future prospect. My point being let's not just focus on the one element of a bigger picture

Neil7, I have a significant holding. I simply commented that 30% was below my expectation. Unlike some - I say it as it is. Whether a holder of a share or not. Actually it would be good to see a few more balanced posters on this website rather than the agenda based ultra rampers or derampers

Well I suppose the positive is (I recall RKB mentioning this the other day) that now bondholders who declined will/may have to convert at a far higher price. 15p?

Bolgas, I think you will find that the writedown of the Debenhams investment was quite significant in the last Sports Direct accounts - might not be significant to MA but significant to SPD. He has made a lot of money over a number of years - he can lose a lot of money over a number of years too if he makes the wrong investment decisions. I suppose any further losses on Debenhams at 6.5p will not be material but who knows what his end game is here. Obviously it is either to sell out at a loss, hold for the long term or use his 29% shareholder as a base to make a bid. You could make a case for all three options ...

Only 30%? Does this mean that our largest bondholder/shareholder actually did NOT agree to convert? If true, i am shocked..