Member Info for Pupper

Hasn't that already happened Tiny?

As I remember it, Aston originally released the news of the Merc deal after hours, representing a potential 20% dilution.

The next morning the share price rose from ~50p to 62p.

Why anyone would choose to forget that escapes me.

I expect the full process again.

When the judge spoke of the 'cost savings' for soa2 he noted such savings as 'you've already contacted all the customers, and have the systems set up', rather than any procedural shortcuts.

Assume the worst, hope for the best.

I think talk of 80% dilution is extreme to say the least.

Allow me to offer you all an alternate outcome...

Stuff we know :
The FCA said "No discussion of Amigo 2.0 without scheme approval."
After ALL consultation with the Customer Committee and their legal advisors; Amigo offer their proposed scheme AND re-lending proposal to the FCA at the same time.

The reason:
The Committee and their legally mandated financial advisors saw 100% payment from future profits as the best outcome.

Zero dilution.

Just saying.

You bought around 48p then, by which time the company was already well into the current troubles.
JB wasn't the owner, he was a shareholder. A majority shareholder. When he gave his reasons (loudly and publicly) and sold out; presumably you thought you knew better and held for the recovery.

It's almost exactly what a company is for; a legal entity that protects the people involved from personal liability.

They can't come after JB, just as they can't come after your profits when you sell.

Rookie move.

All serious investors had a catheter fitted last may.

At 30p I'm hosting a party at InsiderKnowledge's local bus shelter. Bring your own Stella.

I could only follow the court case thanks to ISA-Investor's commentary to this board.

He used the words "wipe out shareholders". Many people were in the call; none of them challenged this phrase. Whether it was a quote or commentary is the only question.

https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/isa-investor/?page=3

Halfway down page 3, from 15:10. 3 posts

WRT the FSA "reserving the right to object" I don't understand how folks misread this.

Would you buy a car if the contract said "we reserve the right to NOT supply a car"?

They said it. Amigo told us about it.

People bought the shares anyway.

Because the FCA wanted "shareholders wiped out" in court, and the judge advised that a debt for equity swap should be considered.

Given that the FCA said "no 2.0 lending approval until SoA is dealt with" (or words to that effect), and that Amigo say "we have submitted both SoA and re-lending application to the FCA" (again; something like that):

Is it possible that the Customer panel have decided that future profits are the best option?

This could potentially see full redress paid, and may limit any potential dilution.

It makes me somewhat happy to think that due to the admin failing to point out the fraud that some of these people are prepared to admit to when seeking her advice, a few of them will feel that this forms the basis of their claim and write it clearly into their complaint.

I only need to think one of them will do this to earn a little smile.

OK that amused me.

Another?

Medium sized?

Vinson holds more than 3% of the company, verifiable through his TR-1 notification via RNS.

Get the calculator out.

DBX numbers low in Germany?

Allow me...international relations are my specialty.

Achtung Deutchlanders!

Kaufen sie das DBX! Es ist gut!

Donka shern.

Ahh. That was soothing. Thanks Cando.

It's starting to get interesting again.

National park status?

Try here:
https://planning.snowdonia-npa.gov.uk/swiftlg_snpa/apas/run/WPHAPPCRITERIA

found 1 from GF for mineral exploration in 2000 or so, so may be the right place to look.

Key phrase for me:

"I thought I knew what we had to do." (or similar)

subtext:
"I didn't."

sub-subtext:
"I still don't."

We'll have to see where it goes, as appeals are common practice, but I'm inclined to agree with broomes.

Stopping on-track and running back to the pits would seem to be a clear indication that the team knew fuel was an issue.

Nice video Tiny, very entertaining.

I don't want to spoil it so I won't say too much, but props to some of the younger guys who did well.

Seb's the boss though!

Very Impressive.

Daibando, it's a pretty rock, and the story resonates with me. I can imagine the excitement that a couple of lads with hammers and torches must have felt when they "struck gold"!

Q: When did we learn the content of the FCA letter regarding the first scheme?
A: A day after the court case when the FCA published it on their website.

Q: Was there information that could be considered "price sensitive" in that letter?
A: Here is a link to the FCA letter.
https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/correspondence/fca-letter-concerns-amigo-loans.pdf
Note para 5.5
"The FCA also notes with particular concern that the Group's shareholders retain their full ownership stake in the Group despite not contributing any funds to be made available to meet Ascertained Redress Scheme Claims."

and para 5.6
"The FCA considers the absence of any shareholder compromise to be a material consideration for creditors and the Court in relation to the overall fairness of the Scheme."

You judge.

One day after this letter Amigo released an RNA (24.3.21). It made no mention of the above paragraphs.

I very much doubt we are being told anything like the full story this time, and pretty sure we wouldn't have seen details of the FCA letter last time if they themselves had not published it.

And lo the chairman spake unto the gathered throng...

"Our first cars will be rolling out at the factory as planned, as I said five months ago that we would be doing. So it's very much on time."

Lol.
WhY iS nObOdY tAlKiNg AbOuT tHiS!!??