Member Info for Mousekewitz

I want to kick myself... that I slept in this morning and couldn't get back in for under 8p. I really do. I should have done a fill or kill. Should have, would have, could have... or in other words, which at least Vinson will understand: "Haette, haette, Fahrradkette".

robimolnar, look up above, there is a grey box called 'Filters on'. Copy the name of the user you want to filter, click on the that box, then paste the name in there and click the red box called 'filter Chat'.

All these trades came through as buys, all are AT, all for the same amount. Is this a coincidence, a fluke, or what is this?
02-Jun-21 12:18:07 9.00 31,735 Buy* 8.655 9.00 2,856 A
02-Jun-21 12:18:01 9.00 31,735 Buy* 8.67 9.00 2,856 A
02-Jun-21 12:17:58 9.00 31,735 Buy* 8.655 9.00 2,856 A
02-Jun-21 12:17:55 9.00 31,735 Buy* 8.66 9.00 2,856 A
02-Jun-21 12:17:53 9.00 31,735 Buy* 8.655 9.00 2,856 A
02-Jun-21 12:17:44 9.00 31,735 Buy* 8.755 9.00 2,856 A

JSP thanks for clarifying your point. Your comment sounded a like a mix between being naive and reckless. Thanks for you well-wishes for my investments. They are all fine and I have made nice profits through Amigo and been pondering if I should go back in, but as I said... I hate losing ;-)

Mark@1973 wasn't it exactly that what the FCA is refusing to do? Didn't they say they'd offer no support in the design of the scheme? So all of the companies that came up with a scheme were stabbing completely in the dark, as the regulating body refused to come up with a regulation.

JSP, your wording stuns me "all or nothing - IF Amigo survives we COULD be 10x from here.." and then "Fingers crossed".

These are the words of a gambler, not of an investor. I personally HATE to lose money when investing, you don't seem to care much, but seem to love the adrenalin kick. Therefore you comment is completely irrelevant.

HOLDIT and Mark_rs would you please elaborate on that? For the last few days I was observing the numbers and something didn't make sense to me, but with that prolee character on the board, I couldn't be bothered to raise this. So if you could explain that a bit better, I'd appreciate that. Thanks.

viking, another good point. That would be quite a well-known scenario for me. A company-eating machine driving the price down to take the small company over for pittance. I could name at least two, one large one with two letters separated by a "&" and one individual who lives in hotels only as, according to himself, owning a property is an unwanted burden for him.

calamari, what I want read, is what e.g. people like Mark@1973 writing, thought, which are well communicated. I certainly do not want to read you quoting me, with an interpretation that is completely wrong and I definitely don't want to read the psychopathic rambling on from the prolees in this world, neither do wish to read any sob-stories from the Marxist side, who wish to eliminate the free economic world that gives everybody a chance to better themselves. So, please dive back deep into your pond and play with the other shrimps.

viking, that is a very, very good point. Didn't GJ talk about 'new products that will stun the market' and also about 'new markets' in a video?

viking, thank you for your interpretation. I think we agree that Amigo has a massive issue when it comes to communicating anything. It's either wishy-washy or doom & gloom in such a way, that even Vinson's suggestion of doing the due diligence does not help much.
As for the need for regulated lenders, you are spot on.

RANT-WARNING:
Since Provi stopped their door-stop lending, there are already rumours that some desperate people have turned to unregulated, none-registered lenders. So, well done to the FCA and Camel Lady to find a solution for the victims of unregulated lending with an interest rate of around 1000% . In my honest opinion, both are responsible for having opened the gates in the shark tank as wide as they can be opened. I wonder if they will in future help the victims helping finding compensation for broken jaws and limbs and punched out teeth. But I guess that will not be included in their services, but will... as usual... become the problem of NHS and police and thus costing us all money, not to talk about the traumata caused by that. - RANT OVER!

Mark@1973, Oh yes, I remember you mentioning this about share- and stakeholders and the waves which it caused in here.

Right now I see little to no reason to buy back in. Perhaps by 'stakeholders' they only mean to top shareholders? To me it seems as if they're now just dragging out the inevitable and the RNS of today mentions nearly to the dot the same scenarios that have been speculated about in here, in regards of what we think they are doing right now. To me it didn't even read like 'news'.
I just hope the troll army and especially Field Troll Marshall prolee will shut up for a while, to give others a chance to exchange their thoughts on the situation. Which, in my opinion, has worsened through this RNS.

I have read the rns five times. Twice I have read out loud. Amigo says in it that it will not be pursuing an appeal, but is considering all options, which include insolvency. They say they are thinking through the option of a new scheme and in this process to figure out whether this is appropriate (appropriate towards whome? Claimants or Shareholders?) and possible to deliver another scheme. The word 'cost' of all of this is mentioned.
They also say they would continue to liaise with the FCA to even out the FCA's concerns. But hasn't the FCA said they wouldn't assist Amigo in anything to do with the scheme? So what are they liaising about?
In the last sentence (and I'm not sure if that is a quote of something GJ has said before) he says Amigo would be working with its stakeholders, including the FCA, to achieve that solution (which solution?) as quickly as possible. Does this mean that the FCA is a stakeholder and has any shareholder ever been contacted by Amigo? I have not been contacted by them when I held shares.
I'm still considering my options of getting back in, but right now this RNS reads like a warning to me. If this was an attempt to deliver some reassurance, they have failed where I am concerned. The delay of publishing the financial papers is also something that gets me on the edge.

Perhaps even after many times of reading the RNS I have not deciphered it correctly. So any feedback is welcome, but not from the troll army, thanks.

Same here, viking. I pulled out for the same reason and I would also buy back in when there is more stability and some news that hint towards positivity. Even though I have made profits before, I see no point risking that and would also go back in with the amount of my initial investment. No more.

Copy and pasted. Generic reply. BoD is reviewing ALL instead of NEW or FURTHER options and that includes the one nobody wants to wake up to. At least nobody invested.

BAck to normal it seems. I didn't notice any volatility that would have caused that.

Is it possible that is in auction? On H&L it says sell price higher than buy price. It closed down normally, before, though.

I'm still weighing up if I should go back in. My gut-feeling says 'yes', but the silence on behalf of the BoD is too deafening, so right now I'm my gut-feeling of this turning out ok isn't simply wishful thinking.
I really do try to concentrating on the facts, which are looking good to me, but for me right now the unpredictable part is the BoD.

Isn't it: "Bad news travel fast"?

Hi prolee :-) errrm.. sorry :-) investor6 :-)