Member Info for nezlob

for all my distrust of him did not waste money, he took a calculated risk to get himself into a position to influence things.
Even if he fails in the perceived ambition to get Debenhams on the cheap, he may have himself a chunk of a successful High Street business when SPD goes down the pan... lol

I never want MA to take over Debenhams in any shape or form, and of course he has tried to get an out of admin buy. He has shown a lack of understanding with his HOF moves. Not all of us want a downmarket Harrods of the back street

and have held in Boohoo and one of the tricks DEBS is clearly missing is getting the right names behind your brand/product.
Maybe if someone from them is reading this, this is where they need to go. Puma has performed brilliantly in the last few years and Boohoo also, these names without a doubt help.
Get someone behind you DEBS, don't pick upside or realistic though LOL

some truth will out, at least some of it.
It seems perverse that whilst Mike Ashley and the media, have been allowed to issue statements with little basis in fact to Debenhams detriment, that Debenhams must tread carefully as if they issued (over) optimistic statements which in financial authorities view they would not be acting responsibly.
Where are these people when MA is allowed to publish something that might cause a share price collapse and enable him to make a cheap takeover disguised as a save the company. Where are they when shorters such as the powerful like Odey can persuade media coverage to cause price falls to their benefit.
It is an unequal world where a business just trying to trade legitimately but profitably is dominated by these unscrupulous self interested parties.
We are just bit players in this, our money is used to prop these shits up.
Like them none of what I have just said is based in fact but it seems likely to me.

Debenhams needs to be insolvent ... but not in a unrecoverable position.
However it then needs to be agreed by the creditors
It does not actually change any future liabilities/costs, it reduces what is owed to normal creditors, HMRC (I think?) and landlords and rates (I think?)
Rent would remain the same, rates would remain the same, staff costs would remain the same, discounts from suppliers would remain the same. They could be renegotiated but this is not part of a CVA
Debenhams may not need a short term fix but for certain needs a long term fix.
So CVA is not an answer and definitely not an answer on its own.
Renegotiation of rents etc., cost cutting, staffing levels are some of what will make long term differenc which is why Market likes a plan
Also you need to be selling the right thing in the right way which is where hopefully Sergio Bucher and his directors should come in.
Its a long road, but one I would very like to see Debenhams succeed in, even if just for iold times sake, it won't harm my shares either.
Don't see Ma, CVA, PG doing this.
None of you who post on this board are in a position to know if a CVA is right or not

Hmm. Didn't say the checkouts weren't busy, just that they were organised?
Drove past Aldi to get to Tesco and don't regret it.

haven't crossed any thresholds since before Christmas so perhaps they have stopped selling, or are they just on Holidays?

It is not fair or even realistic to be critical of Buchers and Debenhams lack of market update.
They have been under pressure to release figures according to "some analysts" early as things were going to be so dire.
They have had the confidence to resist that pressure.
This should leave the hope that the figures will not be a complete disaster.
To release good figures might be premature, and considered market manipulation, and there is enough of that going on already.
There is no point in releasing reasonable figures ahead of schedule.
The price collapsed before any of the trading actually happened so I think it is right for Debs to sit tight now when things will all happen in due course

I was impressed by the service I got at 2 Tesco's just before Christmas. They were busy, but were really organised and there was no great wait at the checkouts. I have been to these two stores many times before and up until recently have felt disappointed with things especially at one of them even at not especially busy times.
The fact that Tesco clearly had some plans in place and executed them well, at least in those 2 stores, gives me some confidence for some good results and an improved sp.

Can't help but worry the figures even if flat may not be looked at favourably by the market.
Debenhams has Mike Ashley despite being a major shareholder pushing against it.
You'd guess some shorters still working away.
Somehow the media seem to be complicit with them.
Then we have the odd "realistic view" on here.
It all is a little discouraging.
Anyway I sold most of shares I bought at 4.8p at just under 6, leaving the "profit" from them in shares plus shares I paid a great deal more for as my bet and hope for success next week.
Good luck to Sergio Bucher, the Debenhams board and staff, the shareholders and posters on here, I think they deserve it more that the first lot mentioned here, but unfortunately deserving does not always come into it!

a pantomime
He's (MA) behind you .... (as in not behind you one bit)

Hun Sen did not make this up, its on the AJBell website.
It's not exactly a nice piece and maybe AJBell man has some problem with DEB.
But it is right to be posting on here, as a view.

Upside you say "People coming on here talking up the company based on what they view is strong sales for DEBs based on what they've seen in the week before Christmas at an isolated store! Blimey, I've been investing wrong all this time...."
However why have you joined this website only since November and only posted on Debenhams. Many of your arguments may have some basis in reality, but so does apparent good trading at any store, online etc.. You clearly cannot have a shareholders interest in this business, so why are you able to devote so much time running it down?
Clearly you may well know about making things up.
You may yet glory in being proved right, seeing what was a shop that many of y=us has enjoyed going down. Seeing that shop end up in hands of an entrenpeneur who you have to struggle to like and believe he has any ineterest in other than his fat pockets. Seeng shorters succeed, people who have no business in being involved in share dealing except to benefit from others pain.
Well good for you!

The creditors will have no right to anything of the company, they will just be paid some amount of what they are owed. A percentage they have to agree/accept, or risk company having to seek administration.
In some ways the CVA will benefit shareholders at least in theory as it will reduce liabilities.
The creditors are the ones that get hurt, but sometimes it is better being hurt a little by agreeing a settlement level, than losing all you are owed

Hard to imagine any of those pieces will be saved for the likes of us!
The CVA will not mean new leases automatically, it might be better to negotiate with the risk rather than an actual CVA.
Though it clearly has not helped Debenhams much as yet.
If it ends up as a CVA as a shareholder and customer I hope you are right Sains, but I cannot help but doubt it.
To me the best scenario is Debenhams stands on its own two feet and negotiates new deals based on mutual benefit. It can work, business does not have to be brutal.
That way shareholders should see some return.
As a customer I went to Lillywhites not so long back and saw what the Harrods of the high street might look like, to me it was sad.

does not bring in any fresh money, it allows a company to pay off just a percentage of its debts. It will include most liabilities, like tax, rates, rent and suppliers. It does not dilute the shares as such. It is fine for a short term relief while the company returns to profitability. It does not necessarily have a long term impact, it will not reduce rent, rates etc. (just rent etc. owed). It antagonises suppliers, making them wary, some may cease supplying, but many will look to the long term in hope they will win back losses, with the better cash-flowed business.
Unfortunately it is sometimes the last shot at bosses and owners screwing a bit more from a business, perhaps some people might spring to mind who will like this. However most shareholders will not benefit unless the company is saved and goes on to better days.

lot more shares being sold than bought, but for what reason?

anyone know why?
is this some sort of manipulation?

last year was 2.4p and interim earlier this year 0.5p so yield probably would have been 26% at some point earlier, now is about 21.5%. Doubt this will be maintained the 0.5p interim was down from over a penny in 2017, still even 50% of the 2.4p would be a good final dividend.
10% for me at average of 12p

should be 49p and ex's 9Nov