Member Info for Pianista

The takeover is now just an "asset sale" WITHOUT SHAREHOLDER APPROVAL, which effectively blocks any other bidder from making an alternative offer.

Apparently, they've orchestrated this with the blessing of the Taleover Panel. Talk about corruption!

I suspect the deal, the "asset sale", will complete well before 22 Feb, without any warning. There is no sign of anyone coming along and trying to block it, so hanging on to these shares in that hope is delusional.

Hoskings are in a better position than most to block the deal, but even they don't seem interested - in particular, their latest letter to shareholders says nothing on the subject.

They are clearly focused on pursuing their claim for damages, nothing more.

If they thought their chances were slim, they'd sell now at 4p rather than wait for 1p. But by keeping their shares, they retain influence, eg the power to requisition a GM, which should prove very useful to them in their quest for justice, and suggests they are confident of winning.

Any other holder would be well-advised to get shot of their shares, or the majority of them, at the current inflated price.

exetrchief - I was only talking about the CEO and CFO's removal from the board of Flybe Group plc, which they'll be resigning from anyway, leaving only Laffin to be removed.

"Going after them" is a separate matter, and one which I agree wholeheartedly should be pursued.

Starance - not only was the consortium privy to the information, it was talking directly to the credit card companies according to Hoskings. This sounds highly suspicious.

The point is, the other two main directors, the CEO and CFO, are transferring to the consortium anyway, so it won't be necessary to remove them as well.

"the deterioration of liquidity [since November 2018] ascribed to the credit card companies" is what was reported on 11 Jan.

This was NOT clearly stated in the accounts to November 2018, because it hadn't yet happened!

Looks like Hoskings got the wrong Hoskings company to sign the requisition letter - or maybe they'll have an answer, let's see.

At worst, it's a mere technicality that will put things back a few days. I'd rather they make a minor slip-up like this than overlook something more substantive.

Tav, Laffin won't go of his own volition: they want to spin this out as long as possible. Hence also the latest RNS.

962, as I've said before there are very few conditions to be satisfied before the deal completes. Check the SPA.

The fat lady is waiting in the wings...those with sensitive ears, keep them covered!

Drofdarf - precso's post at 15.33 yesterday contained a link to the all-important Hoskings letter which was attached to the email from Kohn.

"If shareholders vote against the current deal, then a lot of people will lose jobs."

THERE IS NO VOTE ON THE DEAL. It's an asset sale by the parent company that could complete at any moment.

Shareholders will only get a vote on the Ip takeover of the (denuded) parent company, and the Laffin/Kohn situation, which are separate issues.

So if the shareholders vote against the takeover, it won't make any difference to the business. It'll just mean that they'll be swapping their 1p from the consortium for (probably less than) 1p from the eventual liquidation of the parent company.

Drofdarf - We must count our blessings: the BOD have made the task of those seeking redress that much easier by messing up so monumentally badly, and we are extremely fortunate to have Hoskings as an ally.

We can take great heart from their letter to us yesterday seeking our support. Apart from the causes for complaint which they set out so cogently, it is clear that they expect to find other skeletons in the cupboard.

I'm not banking on a quick resolution, but things are certainly moving in the right direction. And who knows, the BOD may even see sense and launch a compensation scheme in order to forestall an even worse judicial outcome for them and their co-conspirators.

Offfice, I'm all for differing opinions, but there is so much "noise" on this BB that useful, informative posts are being drowned out. It makes it hard to keep up with the important stuff, like the fantastic work by Ox42 and others on the timeline, the discussion of brokers' failure to inform shareholders of the EGM, etc.

Officemanager - I don't expect any (printable!) responses from the rampers to my helpful advice. The best response would be for them to stop clogging up this BB, and allow the rest of us to have a sensible discussion.

S4K - aren't you aware of the open letter from Hoskings to shareholders yesterday in which no mention at all was made of any intention to stop the sale?

As this news sinks in, the SP will drift down over the coming weeks to 1p - unless the sale completes in the meantime, in which case it will drop like a stone to 1p. Dangerous times for gamblers.

...as attached to the email from Mr Kohn.

Fascinating stuff. For example, it reveals that after the bid announcement on 11 Jan, Hoskings were told by the BOD that they (the BOD) hoped other bidders would now come forward. Then on 15 Jan, the BOD dropped the bombshell that the trading company would now be divested. (Frankly, there wasn't time to do the paperwork: it must have been pre-planned).

The letter also implies that the consortium itself precipitated the credit card problem - to their advantage. If true, we have the deep pockets of the consortium to look to for damages.

No sign whatsoever of an injunction - gamblers take note.

Me too.

I agree that if all it has taken to keep the company afloat was a £10m loan, it should not have been given away.

So, with the asset sale possibly completing any day now, it may seem surprising that Hoskings have not already applied for an injunction to stop it.

However, they may not yet have sufficient hard evidence to apply for an injunction; but the more they delay, the less the chance of success, and of it happening at all.

The last thing they'd want to do is apply, and fail. I believe in any case that the Court would say that damages would be an adequate remedy for them.

It's best therefore for Hoskings to wait until they have gathered sufficient evidence, and sue for damages. Their latest moves do seem to point to this.

So anyone buying now is likely to get 1p, or nothing - apart from the chance to take part in the vote to remove the chairman.

If you think about it, it's more relevant than ever at this time...

If you think about it, it's more relevant than ever at this time...