Member Info for Piler

Oh, and Mouchel at least offered shareholders SOMETHING (to offer hibu shareholders the same amount would cost about a measly 20 million quid - this from a company with a revenue I believe of about 1.5 billion and a free cash flow of a few hundred million - again, I stress I think those figures are about right) 11) Tantalizing snippets of exciting sites such as hibuLife appear too have been made available 'accidentally on purpose', only to dematerialize for no apparent reason (there were MANY instances were news of hibu-related developments / services where suppressed)

1) They had enough free cash to have continued servicing the debt for some time to come - i.e. they defaulted VOLUNTARILY, and so in a sense voluntarily handed over the company to the vulture funds and Goldman Sachs (who purchased their debt at a whopping discount at the last auction) 2) No realistic attempt was made to launch any of the digital products they said they would 3) No realistic attempt at anything for that matter seems to have been made despite the enormous length of time they were apparently in talks 4) Their own last 'fair value' estimate (relatively recently in the scheme of things) was 12 p per share, and NO material changes had occurred since (other than their voluntarily defaulting); intent does not have to proven for a charge of misleading accounting to be successful 5) Despite 1) Bob Wigley had pledged they would do all they can to "protect shareholder value to the fullest extent possible" 6) The BOD took cash rather than share incentives despite 5) 7) Also despite 5), at no time did the BOD refute factually inaccurate and detrimental reportage in the national press 8) Also despite 5) I don't recall a single positive RNS being issued all the time they were supposedly in restructuring talks (as I recall there were one or two encouraging developments) 9) Although no positive RNSs were released, the overall tone of other news circulated by hibu was totally at odds with the reality as they have now reported it (only a few weeks ago they were still describing themselves as a LEADING provider of digital services - huh?!) 9) CEO Mike Pocock lied when he said an announcement regarding hibu would be made at the annual Microsoft conference last year - the question to ask (a rhetorical one almost as the answer is obviously yes) is whether this could have been expected to affect the share price positively (it was the ONLY reason I and I suspect many others invested) 10) Mike Pocock also strikes me as a closet fan of saccharine-sweet soft rock combo Chicago, and that's as good a reason as any to give 'em grief

Indeed, and why tantalize shareholders / potential investors with a taster of the hibuLife website (which seemed really quite snazzy - I was impressed), for instance, only for it to then vanish into the ether? Was this before they defaulted voluntarily? I honestly can't remember - this saga has dragged on for so long I was distracted by the Apollo program at the time!

You say nothing is rarely achieved but has it ever been, and has misconduct in its various forms ever been as blatant when a company has remained completely untouched by the wheels of justice? Another question to ask is just WHY it took SO LONG to arrive at a deal in which shareholders get nothing (in absolute not relative terms). It's almost as if the BOD are hoping to rely on the SMOKESCREEN OF TIME to mask their lies (oh yeah - lies!) and misleading statements (double yeah baby) given they left it as long as they possibly could. Perhaps they think we have short memories and are really that stupid. Seriously then - another question: WHAT EXACTLY DID TAKE SO LONG AND WHAT ALTERNATIVES WERE PROPOSED AND DISCUSSED?!

One question the HSG should put to the courts and / or the FCA is exactly what the point of them is if they deem the current scheme of arrangement acceptable. I.e. just what WOULD they rule against, matters of clear criminality aside as that would be a job for the police / SFO - i.e. are they just a waste of space? Giving the BOD the benefit of the doubt for the moment (the only time I will unless what is proposed is overturned), perhaps they'd welcome action by shareholders in this way. Perhaps they even accepted such a diabolical deal to almost preempt it?!! Perhaps I'm suffering a variation on a theme of the Stockholm syndrome.

"I am sorry but you are the short sighted one who preferred to correct other people's grammar rather than digest their message." Oh pay no attention to that. I apologise but I'd had a skinful and was angry at the directors (you blamed management as I recall but blame lies with the decision-makers past and present). It really is most unlike me ordinarily. Anyway, I invested based on a lie by the CEO (as many did) and the pledge by the chairman to protect shareholders to the "fullest extent possible". The latter was perhaps being naive but the former wasn't. And what about this business of defaulting on their loan repayments when they were in a position to continue servicing them? If that delivered the company into the hands of creditors, was that acting in the best interests of shareholders? I've a sneaking suspicion all may not be over. We'll see.

"of 1p in the pound"!! Too angry!

Given the number of shares in issue and their cash flow even now, a token payment of 1p in the penny would have cost them a pittance in the scheme of things. I for one will never use them again unless I have absolutely no choice, and - although such boycotting by (ex-)shareholders may not amount to much in the scheme of things - it's perfectly possible that they'll lose more in revenue as a result than they'd have surrended by way of such a small offering to appease us. It was short-sighted, moronic blanket greed such as this that sent Yellow Pages down the crapper in the first place. May they all rot - I'll do all I can to precipitate this!

Meant "lie about the announcement"

"they always did say the shares had little or probably no value." LIKE HELL THEY DID - this bombshell came AFTER many were duped into investing following Pocock's lie about announcement concerning hibu at the annual Microsoft conference that never was (and Wigley's pledge to do all they could to protect shareholders)!! C'mon Ceebsy and crew - give 'em hell!

"If you were trading this, you would have been stopped out"? So what? If you mean as in stop losses you're asking for trouble using them at such a critical juncture. (And it's not the correct past participle, and it's fine to start a sentence with "And"!!)

"I had forecasted"?!! I'm normally not the sort to comment on shortcomings in grammar, but do one! If anyone failed holders it was the DIRECTORS, not management. Oh, and, to all disinterested (as opposed to uninterested!) observers, don't you think it strange that so many 'earwigs' are coming out of the woodwork right now?! I've a sneaking feeling that we (shareholders as opposed to bottom feeders) may well be pleasantly surprised on Thursday. I'll say no more.

The one practically on York University campus?

Do they still have a site in York Science Park?

In fact, I'll go further: would a significant purchase by the CEO benefit the SP? Rather, is it reasonable to assume it would? If so then the BOD are not doing all they can to protect shareholder value to the fullest extent possible, in breach of BW's pledge! With bells on!!

It may not be MP's fault (though I'm not sure I'd agree entirely that it's not), but what's stopping him using his - ahem - hard earned to buy a few bleedin' shares?! The directors surely can't have been disqualified from doing so for this long.

I think they have until the end of July to release results glovers (someone posted this on iii a few days back), so not much longer to wait if this is the case. I like your estimation - fingers crossed! I'm sure people are still reading posts, but most of what there is to say for the time being has been said I suppose. Think I'll just set an RNS alert myself and try to forget about all things hibu for the next few weeks.

"The word on the st seems to be that google will offer pay per click options that will kill the current market leaders." I read about the pay per click thing a good few months back now and thought at the time it could only spell good news for us and other e-commerce providers (I realise we're not quite there yet!), and - frankly - that it would be an insane move by Google. The same article also commented on the results of extensive market research which had shown (as conclusively as market research can show anything I suppose) that consumers are abandoning, at quite a high rate, general search engine sites in favour of using those through which they anticipate eventually making a purchase from the outset. The context being that only about 20% of Google searches are revenue generating. Hardly flavour of the month at the moment are they? Just saying.

Just searched with Google Chrome and - yeah - the link has been removed. Furthermore, I tried accessing the cached version by clicking the arrow pointing down just below the link but that's been removed too. Been a lot of that sort of thing about when it comes to hibu of late. Interesting - why place it in the public domain in the first instance only to then go through the hassle of clearing the cache (not that I know what's actually involved in doing that but I reckon it'd be a hassle!). Anyway, almost time for me to call it a day. Good luck all holders.

Meant "Did you get the impression they're (Investor Relations) on a 'tight leash', by the way?"