Member Info for LTHcine

no.. the company needs more money for Amigo 2.0. Dont think there will be any dividends for a while.

10% is worst base case scenario without factoring in the 15% of pre tax profits for 4 years dum dum

"The FCA is an independent public body funded by the firms it regulates, by charging them fees. It is, however, accountable to the Treasury and to Parliament."

Well said - Bedonebyasyoudid

Franky say relax - but the FCA seem to think the board they approved for Amigo are now liars not to be trusted, that along with the fact that PWC (also FCA rehulated) have reviewed Amigos finances and came to the conclusion that the other option is insolvency with a 35m shortfall to pay secured creditors. Okay i relax now ;)

The reason i found this BB was because Shamus12 was trolling Cineworld, and i think it was expru came there to defend him when i was mouthing him off. Went on exprus page seen where he had been commenting and found Seamus12 to be a much nicer version lol Now im stuck here ;)

Lets hope so Flakey, someone needs to regulate the regulator by the seems of it. To send a QC in full guns blazing is absolutely madness. He seemed off the rails suggesting things like wiping out all existing shareholders and handing the equity to claimants? thats bonkers.. but hopefully the judge will see sense.

timmy - heading straight for name calling rather than have an adult conversation? brilliant. People clearly read these boards and fact is you dont know who they are. They didnt like the fact shareholders will stand to gain? you think they dont read this board then to find any little thing people say? They have lost the plot as you saw in court?

Stevie if i wanted out i would have got out at 30p, i wanted to see this through but i didnt realise how mad the FCA had got with their socialist ideologies. But i guess thats the way the world is turning? You would think that its overstepping for a regulator of the free market to suggest shareholders should be held accountable for a companies mistakes. But obviously not. How many people are going to invest in banks or any other company for that matter, i certainly would never invest in a bank in future if every time bankers screwed up the shareholders were liable to punishment?

The point is not so much that it just effects me, as i took my risks, but it effects everyone if judge decides to take the FCA seriously with their mental ideologies. Now we still have rampers in here trying to up the price before judge has even made his decision which would prove the FCAs point of huge rewards for shareholders :S seems odd that you would try to ramp after all those months of deramping?

Its just ridiculous to mention such high figures when we have a huge hurdle being the FCA thinking shareholders shouldnt profit.. seems like they are going to make us pay one way or the other, hopefully not major dilution as im all in and it would absolutely crush me.

You'v either lost your marbles or trying to ramp and failing

So many people in here talking about gambling.. usually they are the shorters who borrow shares from the bookies? Had Shorterguy on Cineworld always talking about shareholders being gamblers.. that didnt end well for him with his 30p short position. He used to talk about people averaging down as fully gambling and then averaged his short position until i assume he ended his trading career?

the trolls here tonight all seem like socialists at the FCA coming on to wind us up to have something to show the judge.. either that or people who have NSF shares and want us to sink so they become #1 loan company

what fund raise? at these prices its out of the question without serious dilution wiping out innocent peoples pensions and stuff.. maybe if we agreed to do a 10% equity raise when the price hits £1 to raise a further £47.5m to add to the scheme fund?

Judge has a tough decision on his hand, with one of his possible decisions leading to 350+ job losses in Bournemouth/ Claimants receiving nothing due to secured creditors pulling the plug/ Future lenders having less options for borrowing other than loan sharks etct,etc. The other choice is wether insolvency is really the only other option than this scheme, which he's not sure that insolvency IS the only other option. Maybe after going through the figures he will see that it truly is. Maybe not. But, the first judge agreed that the vote should go ahead after seeing the figures/ £35m shortfall to pay secured creditors.

Gary suspended the shares due to limited space at the court hearing and save people from being screwed over with information they didnt have access to, nothing more. No reason to keep them suspended after court.

I personally have gone all in, wouldnt recommend anyone else do it though. Its not nice when its going against you, but i see further than 10 mins into the future what i envisage of Amigo's future.. and thats the decision i made.

why would anyone sell? its beyond me, only thing i can think is maybe stop losses

The shareprice has NOTHING to do with fairness of the scheme... The shareprice only started rising when the FCA said they wont oppose the scheme, the shareprice is still very fragile as you will witness when the market opens. BUT that has phuckall to do with fairness of the scheme..