Member Info for Mitch984

Woodstock - let's concentrate on this board on the EGM request by Hoskins rather than wider market manipulation.

Many board visitors only read the first page of posts, and should be reading about the Chairman challenge by Hoskins - as that is the most positive news to come out to date on this debacle.

Please save your market manipulation posts for a later date as they are not solely relevant to FlyBe at this time.

Aphrodite - that ignores Hosking coming in with a legal challenge to the bid and asset sale deal. They still have 18% plus of Flybe shares, and would be sitting on a loss of well over £10 million if they lay back and accept the 1p. Possibly much more than £10 million if they bought their shares a few years ago.

A legal challenge stops the sale of assets. Connect would possibly then withdraw their £10 million loan, but I think there are other investors or bidders on the sideline waiting to replace that loan to keep Flybe going.

Th alternates need the legal challenge though, and that can only originate from a shareholder in situ at the time the FlyBe board accepted the 1p bid. I don't think it can come from Mr Tinkler as he bought in after that time, although I am sure he will be involved with the alternatives to the Connect sale.

This is not yet anywhere near all over, as there being more buys than sells on Friday shows.

Hoskings have still not sold, so must think that they can stop the asset sale. To be willing to do that, they must know that there are other alternatives in the background to either keep FlyBe as is with new funding, or sell to a higher bidder, or have Connect come back with a better offer.

Hoskings would not consider legal action without a concrete back up plan. I'm still holding, despite the board's RNS today, which digs them deeper into a hole in my view.

" but whilst all this confusion is going on start buying, buy as much as you can until you finally have 75%. "
"Not for offshores ;-)"

Even offshores would have to file a Form 8.3/8.5 if they acquired more than 1% of the company and a TR1 if they acquired 3% or more.

As of today, there have been no filings from new investors other than Mr Tinkler, nor have there been significant filings from existing 1%+ holders. Much of the volume therefore is from gambling private investors, but the crucial fact to note is that institutional holders like Hosking have not sold.

"what you really want is the research and up to date news back priceless!!!"

Zac - absolutely not! I don't want mindless ramping when there is no concrete news or based on joining one thousand unconnected dots.

I want ramping based on actual news that stresses the realistic huge potential here. The company itself plays everything ultra low key. When we do get the impending positive news, it needs pushing. That is what I'm saying.

I can get the "speculation" from Twitter anyway, including the "booms" the past few days.

Strange as it may seem to say, if we want the share price to get back to 20p+ we actually need the rampers back. This is AIM and for a share to rise without concrete news, or indeed for a share to rise on news plus extra speculation, it needs the buzz around it that the rampers create.

I would like to see us climb back over 20p - and stay there. But the word needs to get out again about Zioc's potential for us even to get back to 20p.

"ref the point did anyone get notified about the upcoming vote- two things flow from that;
1. We may have a case against our brokers for not informing us of the coporate action , which is likely down to them unless flybe did something outside normal protocols.The total PI vote may not have been enough to change the result - i have not done the maths.
2. We may have a stronger case that we were therefore unaware of the company's listing change which could have rung some alarm bells and we sold avoiding any loss who knows?
Something to think about."

I held FlyBe shares through two different brokers. Neither notified me of a Corporate Action, and they say (informally) that they themselves were not notified of anything from FlyBe that required a vote from their FlyBe nomineee shareholders.

If FlyBe were obliged to notify all shareholders holding shares via nominee accounts of the listing vote, it is my opinion that they did not do it. However because it was voted on at the AGM, there may not be any obligation for a Corporate Action.

"I think it's clear that Tinkler (sold 1% of his Stobart holding, RNS today) is increasing his FLYB holding on the open market hence the sp increasing the last 2 days."

That is not correct unfortunately. Mr Tinkler has to file a RNS Form 8.3 or 8.5 within 24 hours if he buys or sells even 1 FlyBe share. He also has to file a TR1 if his overall shareholding increases by 1%.

There have been no FlyBe filings from him since his 12% purchase was announced.

Remember the sale of Flybe Limited (including Flybe Aviation Services Limited) and Flybe.com Limited has a long stop date for the Divestment of 22 February 2019.

I think legally, this means that either side can pull out of the deal until then if any conditions are not met. Equally I think the deal can also be challenged in law until that date.

I am not a lawyer though, but with the amount of buys still coming through, something does seem to be going on in the background. Personally I would be happy with anything over 1p if it means the sale to Virgin/Stobart doesn't go through. They have acted disgracefully in my opinion.

I wonder whether Andrew Tinkler had got wind of this, and his 12% purchase was to force an Emergency General Meeting?

I really do not think Mr Tinkler's purchase of 12% of FlyBe has anything to do with a rise in the value of his Stobart shares. Stobart was at 275p per share a year ago, compared to 168p today, so the value of his Stobart shares has varied widely anyway.

He stated publicly today that his FlyBe purchase was an "investment decision" and that he has "huge faith in the potential of FlyBe with the right balance sheet and stakeholder support".

That does not sound to me like someone who has purchased shares to support the bid!

" It is the reason Virgin et al do not want Flybe to go to the wall because those slots will lapse back to BA. "

That is a very key statement. If FlyBe goes into administration, Virgin/Stobart will NOT get the FlyBe slots even if they buy other elements of FlyBe out of administration.

"Perhaps the lower than average institutional investment is one of the reasons they have made a low offer, and perhaps some of the II's have hedged with short positions (just a thought as I have seen no evidence for this) "

Any II's that have taken out a hedge of more than 1% since the "open for sale announcement" would have had to file a Form 8.3 or 8.5 via an RNS, so I don't think any of the II's have hedged against their existing holdings.

The big question though is which of them sold on Friday. Personally I think it was part of Hosking's holding that Tinkler bought on Friday, but that is just speculation. I am hoping there are still more than 25% in II hands to vote the bid down, even without the PIs and Mr Tinkler.

Most PIs I am sure will vote "no", but its only the Institutional Investors who will have any kind of voice that the board will listen to. As they did with the overall bid, the board will continue to totally ignore us Private Investors.

"Who's to say he's not working with Stobart, therefore, instead of against them, perhaps in return for Stobart's dropping the charges against him. "

Stobart have already dropped all charges against Mr Tinkler. Stobart are appealing one charge that Tinkler won, but Tinkler has no charges left against him that he can use his vote to barter to be dropped - unless it is to drop the appeal.

www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-6443791/Showdown-Stobart-inside-story-ugly-boardroom-battle-fought-High-Court.html

His share purchase on Friday therfore looks like it is in anticipation of a new counter bidder, or pure revenge against Stobart through increasing the "no" vote against the £1 offer.

" Don't forget Virgin/Stobart will not get the Heathrow slots if FlyBe goes into adminstration. Well...they might do.....the Administrators job would be to seek a sale of assets to pay off creditors....so..if Virgin/Stobart bid for them...then ...yes...the Administrators could decide to sell them to them."

I don't think the Administrators can sell the slots. I'm pretty sure this was discussed on the board last week, and the rules are that they have to be distributed equally amongst existing airlines in that category. Even if the Administrators can sell them, Virgin/Stobart are not guaranteed to get them all - and those they do get will cost them way more than today's bid.

I still think therefore that Virgin/Stobart cannot allow FlyBe to go into administration, so have to get this bid accepted.

We need our aviation slot posters back in action from a couple of weeks ago to guide on this.

Don't forget Virgin/Stobart will not get the Heathrow slots if FlyBe goes into adminstration.

That means they HAVE to get shareholder approval for this deal - and that means they HAVE to find some way for the bid to be approved. There are enough shares in non FlyBe hands to easily vote NO, so there must be some incentive over and above the 1p for shareholders that isn't clear at the moment.

I will be holding.

Hi Jay12.

No, I wasn't making any comparision between FlyBe and Zioc as companies - other than they are both AIM, and on AIM anything can happen. FlyBe shareholders aren't the first to get screwed over on AIM, and won't be the last.

I do agree though that a 69 year old with Tony Trahar's track record doesn't get involved with new technology unless he sees its potential. That can only be good for us.

"Should, for some reason, they reject the offer then administration will follow and they will get nothing. Instead Virgin and Stobart will pick up what they want for peanuts and creditors, bankers and others will take a haircut while even more staff will pick up a black bag and P45."

As far as I am aware, if the company goes into administration, they lose their slots at Heathrow - and no other airline can pick up those slots through buying FlyBe out of administration.

If this deal is to go ahead in the way that Virgin/Stobart want it to, they cannot do it via administration.

I'm no expert on slots, so I am ready to be corrected.

Absolutely correct Extrader - Trahar Senior's track record in the UK does not make for promising reading. However at least it seems to identify the UK company (Materials Processing Institute) behind the Cold Pelletisation initiative.

Cold Pelletisation is only one possible avenue though - the December RNS seemed to concentrate more on conventional pellets.

All in all, I would not say that the Tony Trehar news is massive news. It's interesting news while this whole project crawls along its rocky road. It's still all about patience - with the FlyBe debacle being a useful warning that this is AIM - and anything can happen.

Yes, that rules IAG out of any counter bid. They would not have bought the Gatwick slots if they were interested in bidding.

The slots are the ones currently used for the Newquay flights - it was announced a few weeks ago that the Newquay flights were moving to Heathrow. FlyBe had no other slots at Gatwick.