Member Info for MIKESM

Just FYI MIKEODX, where the RNS refers multiple times to the Companies Court, this is where it sits in the Judicial System. Quote. "The Companies Court (now part of the Insolvency and Companies List) is a specialist court within the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales".

As I said previously, the proposed Scheme of Arrangement has to go through a two stage process at the High Court and would have to be approved by a significant majority of the company's shareholders. The shareholders won't get to vote on the proposal unless and until a judge ALLOWS the SoA to go forward for a vote, - and this is a process that can take some time. May I suggest more investigation before saying that I am incorrect?

MIKEODX, the court has to sanction a meeting of the shareholders at which they would vote on whether to approve the scheme of arrangement or not. I don't know what the requisite percentage would need to be for the scheme to be approved. Read last week's RNS and you will see that in it the word 'Court' is included at least nine times.

MikeODX, the scheme of arrangement has to go through a two stage High Court process in which the judge will approve or otherwise what the board of Tiziana is proposing.

Bluebelly, I do sometimes wonder.... ;-) It certainly gave me no pleasure to lose thousands in selling, but I am obviously concerned about the way things have gone and the general lack of progress that, together with the scheme of arrangement/ court hearings etc could see the share price slide still further due to a lot of uncertainty. I fully intend to keep a close eye on what is happening and if, as I hope will be the case, the new arrangements are approved and there is some genuinely positive progress with foramulab and milciclib and all the wonderful benefits they might provide (absolutely no news to date about the search for a Japanese partner...) then I would certainly be willing to reinvest. For now I will cherish my dormant Accustem shares and hope that one day soon they might awake....

Very impressive. Lots of companies. As I said, there is no doubt about the window dressing...

But look at the numerous video interviews with GC last year, and the written Accustem proposal, in which the timescale for listing on the main market in London was by the third or fourth quarter of 2020. That came and went, then London was dropped in favour of Nasdaq. At the last time of asking Accustem was a company that had no management team that still had to be recruited... How does a company with no management, no new news about its product, no proper website or social media presence expect to gain a public listing on Nasdaq? And when asked in a recent interview Dr Shailubhai saying that he knows nothing about the Accustem situation that has nothing to do with him... The fact that as the Chief Executive of Tiziana he allowed a valuable asset to be taken out of the company - though the spin out was entirely optional and there was no imperative to do so - seems to have bypassed him...

Look at last year's Bloomberg video interview in which GC refers to the Brazil covid trial being based on hospitalised patients who might otherwise require ventilators, where the recent peer reviewed article refers to non-hospitalised outpatients with mild symptoms. And how can it be that after the apparent success of the Brazil covid trial no further trials have yet begun in the tragic situation where so many people are dying...

I could easily go on...

I have been a LTH but despite a significant loss decided yesterday that enough is enough. The cavalier way that this public company is run is simply unacceptable in so many ways and the decision to seek to remove the listing from the LSE where Tiziana is already on the Nasdaq, with all the advantages a US listing can bring, forcing UK shareholders to accept inconvience and currency risk, was the final straw for me.

I know that it can take time for a Life Science company to create certainty and value but it is necessary, along the way, for the commitments and timescales put forward by directors to be adhered to. Time and time again GC and KS have failed to do so miserably, and appear to be totally and unapologetically unaware of the fact. I would be very concerned, having regard to the fact that Accustem was supposed to be listed on the main market in London by the end of last year at the time of this apparently valuable asset being spun out of Tiziana, that the 'old' shares, having been removed from London and New York, might stay in the same non tradable limbo that we are in with Accustem. It seems that GC is more interested in corporate manipulation than the scientific progress the company has to make if it is to succeed. That he justified his massive bonus by reference to a historic agreement unrelated to profitablity, made me wonder whether Tiziana could simply be a cash cow for GC and the BoD. It seems to me that he window dressing may be good, but is there actually anything in the shop?

For the sake of the shareholders I hope my misgivings are wrong. When I see Accustem with a professional website rather than the pathetically amateur one that currently exists, and a tradable listing of my shares that carry the considerable value that Gabrielle Cerrone told us they would have at the time of the spin out, then I may change my mind. Until then I will remain sceptical and watching from the sidelines.. GLA.

Having confidence in the board to maintain Amigo's position in the market is a separate issue to what happened with SoA v1.
SOAs are not commonplace and it seems apparent from what happened after the 96% creditor vote in favour of acceptance of the first SoA took everybody by surprise.

Having had the court's approval to present creditors with the SoA proposal at the first court hearing, and having also had the FCA's written confirmation that it would leave the court and creditors to make the decision, had any of us thought it possible that the resultant overwhelmingly positive vote would have been rejected at the second court hearing we would have sold our shares in the high 20's the day before. It seems to me that the same applied to Amigo and more importantly its QC who was surprisingly unprepared to deal with what happened.

What is important is how SoA v2 is now dealt with. It had to take some time to digest what happened previously and what was needed to ensure a successful, acceptable outcome second time around. The setting up of the customer committee and its involvement in concluding the revised agreement is a major step forward. How soon the discussion/ consultation process will happen is unknown but I would imagine it will be weeks, not months. As I said yesterday, I believe that patience is what's required right now, and is likely to be well rewarded in due course.

I don't post here often, but today feel it's a good idea to set out my thoughts. I have been a shareholder (currently 236k shares) through the ups and downs, and then more ups and downs, but always remain confident that the first class management team assembled to lead Amigo will overcome any historic issues and thereafter maintain Amigo's position as a successful leader in its field.

Earlier this year Christopher Woolard, the former FCA chairman, delivered the FCA-commissioned Woolard Review, in which he confirmed there are large sections of the public who are excluded from mainstream finance that need access to sub-prime, mid-cost lenders, and that there are not enough of them. His conclusion clearly demonstrates that Amigo needs to get back to business as soon as possible.

The Amigo name is a high profile, well established Brand that is well connected to its customer base, most of whom will have been happy with the service they received since the company's inception and will be looking forward to the time when they will once again be able to access the loans they need. Add into the equation the various new products that Gary Jennison has talked about launching and I believe the company has a great future. IMHO we need to be patient until SOA v2 is revealed...

Maverick, I totally agree. As I have posted previously, the BOD and senior executive team that has been assembled over the past year are all highly experienced people who value their reputations for success. They would not wish to see them tarnished and would therefore not have joined Amigo were they were not determined to get over the historic issues and establish a new, and highly successful 'Amigo 2.0'. It may take a while longer to settle the terms of a second SoA, but it will happen, since it is in nobody's interest for it not to. As a long term shareholder I am convinced this company has a wonderful future and am quite happy to wait a while for Gary Jennison to launch the new suite of Amigo products that he, and I am sure JPM, are excited about. Patience right now will, in due course, be rewarded.

As expected, the presentation about the changes to Dignity's future operations made by Gary Channon at the AGM was very impressive. As I suggested in my previous post, he has the ability to analyse where the company can optimise its potential profitability and will undoubtedly deliver for Phoenix and all other shareholders. I feel that the recent rise in the share price is just the start of what is to come....

I agree Vinson. I have been watching the Amigo chat board for a long time and only focus on the posts from serious LTH of which, with your 3% shareholding, you are obviously the most serious. My 250,000 shares is enough to be seriously interested in what is happening with the company, and it is important that I am able to see the comments posted by my fellow shareholders. Unfortunately there has lately been an upsurge in dross, but I just skim over and ignore it. I very much admire the extent of your commitment to Amigo and welcome each and every one of your posts, so please keep them coming...

The FCA-commissioned Woolard Review confirmed there are not enough companies like Amigo to serve sub-prime borrowers' needs and there are high barriers for new entrants. Amigo is a substantial, well established company and is today being run by Gary Jennison and his management team who are approved by the FCA. It must be apparent that the FCA would prefer Amigo to continue to trade.

The key statement in today's RNS is "Amigo will continue to liaise in the coming weeks with its regulator the Financial Conduct Authority ('FCA') to seek to address its concerns as quickly as possible." Shareholders may well have assumed this was happening, but it is nevertheless good to have this confirmation in writing.

I look forward to the RNS confirming that a revised SOA has been formulated that it would not be opposed by the FCA, and that will enable the company to launch the much-anticipated Amigo 2.0 as quickly as possible.

ShareLover, I agree, there is much in it that is relevant to the importance to the mid-cost market of Amigo 2.0 continuing in business under the new management running the company in accordance with the regulatory principles agreed with the FCA . Unfortunately I didn't hear Woolard mentioned, though I would like to think its relevance simply had to be appreciated.

By the way, I bought more after the 95% creditors' vote, and haven't sold anything today. Having seen the share price drop to 6p and held my nerve in the belief that the price would recover there is no question of selling a single share regardless of market turbulence. Amigo is a really good company with an established market presence that serves an important function, and though the CMC-inspired complaints have slightly tarnished its image, the reputation Amigo previously established has been excellent. I am confident that after the overwhelming creditor support for the scheme legal logic will prevail, and that the company has a wonderful future ahead. I would very much like to feel part of it as a committed shareholder....

The truth, Truthfactory, is set out in the "The Woolard Review - a review of change and innovation in the unsecured credit market", commissioned by the FCA and delivered in in February. It states the importance of having mid-cost lenders available for those people who need to borrow but are excluded from mainstream lending due to their credit status. It also refers to there not being enough mid-cost lenders due to the regulatory barriers that inhibit new entrants into the market. The Executive Summary and recommendations on page 5 says: "Access to credit is a major consideration in the market, including the relative lack of mid-cost options for sub-prime customers".

Page 16 of the report: "In practice, this means having available forms of credit outside of the mainstream, including sub-prime and near-prime credit markets. Inevitably, the more risk associated with a customer the higher the risk premium attached to the cost of credit. Even when socially-motivated lenders are engaged, such as Community Development Finance Institutions (CDFIs), rates of interest can be in the high double digits. Chapter 3 discusses access to credit and ways to encourage growth of alternatives to high-cost credit".

The report also confirms that the level of Mid-Cost interest charged by Amigo is appropriate, and may be considerably less than the rates of interest often charged even by socially-motivated lenders . Quote...

Page 32.

Credit Unions

3.14 According to the Bank of England and FCA, in 2019, there were over 400 credit unions
lending around £1.6bn to over 2m members across the UK. Credit unions registered
in Great Britain are subject to the Credit Unions Act 1979, whilst those registered in
Northern Ireland are subject to the Credit Unions (Northern Ireland) Order 1985. This
legislation sets out what credit unions can do and limits their activity to fulfilling certain
statutory objects. They offer an important alternative to consumers who cannot
get mainstream credit as well as access to a wider range of financial services than
consumer credit, including savings and mortgages.

3.15 Legislation caps the amount of interest credit unions can charge on loans (equivalent
to around 42.6% Annual Percentage Rate (APR) in Great Britain and 12.9% in Northern
Ireland). There is a question about whether the cap on rates allows credit unions
enough room to fully serve the sub-prime part of the market. CDFIs aren’t subject
to the same cap and so reflect the risk in the cost of credit they provide, with loans
offered typically in the high double-digits, but also at rates above 100% APR, and in
some cases over 200% APR.

The report also establishes that unless borrowers have access to companies like Amigo they may borrow from High Cost lenders and less savoury sources of loans who are often unregulated.

Here is the link. https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/corporate/woolard-review-report.pdf.

The share/incentive scheme was established to attract a new, top quality management team who will hopefully be capable of creating a highly successful new operation in the form of Amigo 2.0. It is not the case that the management who were running the company when the largely cmc-prompted complaints began would now be benefitting....

Therefore, when the judge raised the question with Amigo's barrister about directors now owning shares in the company and benefitting from incentive arrangements if the company achieves its ambitious targets, it might have been pointed out that the creditors would be beneficiaries too, since they would be receiving a share of 15% of the company's profits each year for four years, and if ambitious targets are achieved and exceeded as a result of the hard work of outstanding management then the quantum of the 4 x 15% would be boosted considerably and those entitled to redress payments would be delighted to receive their increased payments....

ISA, Thanks for reporting I sound like a pleasant enough fellow! And I am pleased you appreciated the points I made to the judge that I felt were extremely important.

Franky, I am not a lawyer but I imagine the full terms of the SOA - including those related to fairness - were thoroughly examined by the judge prior to him first allowing it to go forward for the creditors' vote. With the evidence now before him of a virtually unanimous vote in favour of the scheme by Amigo's creditors - including the FOS - I doubt there would be any basis on which the judge would now seek to amend the terms of the SOA or delay its implementation.

I may be wrong but do not anticipate tomorrow's hearing to be either lengthy or inconclusive. We will soon know....Finger's crossed...

ISA, Many thanks for attending the hearing tomorrow and keeping us informed. I can only imagine the judge, having already done so previously, will approve the SOA on the basis of him being informed there was an almost unanimous creditor vote in favour of it. The FCA neither supported nor opposed the scheme at the time of the first court hearing and I believe any opposition they express tomorrow will be negated by the overwhelming support shown by everyone who voted. I look forward to reading your account of how events unfold...

And please let's not forget that the FOS was entitled to vote and must have voted YES to the SOA for the 95% total of all those who voted to have been reached. It is inconceivable to me that a High Court judge would do anything other than allow the scheme to proceed when it is supported by such an overwhelming vote in favour of it from Amigo's creditors and customers - including the Ombudsman - regardless of any last minute concern being raised by the FCA.

I have been a shareholder in Tiziana for almost a year and have watched the share price rise and fall. I have asked myself on more than one occasion whether this is really likely to prove a worthwhile investment, but each time I do I take another look at the Tiziana website and see the life-changing difference Foralumab will potentially bring to so many people, and the track record of the medical team working on the programme I am convinced that sooner or later the company will be worth many multiples of what it is now. That view is reinforced by the fact that Gabrielle Cerrone has so much skin in the game, along with the smaller, though significant, investors, Fonda, Silverman and Freedberg who, having done some google research, surely know what they are doing.

The Accustem demerger/ flotation process has admittedly been much slower than anticipated, (I suspect that Covid may have contributed to the delay), but when the float finally happens, as I am confident it will, and there are any announcements about the phase 2 Brazil/ covid trial etc, TILS shares are likely to see a major bounce. My conclusion? Perseverance will pay...