Member Info for Pupper

30p was on the basis of creditors being shafted and shareholders remaining intact.

Any new SoA will be worse for shareholders, and the price will only be decided by the market when we know the details. There is NO guarantee of 30p.

Bear in mind that 'discussions with the FCA' could be going just as well as they did last time. We're getting a similar amount of communication from amigo on the subject.

The noisy tweet was teasing this then. Here's the press release that spawned these 3rd party articles:

https://media.astonmartin.com/aston-martin-valkyrie-amr-pro-the-ultimate-no-rules-hypercar/

It concerns me that Provident have been able to react our case with more urgency than Amigo have.

We've had no mention of a customer advocate or legal advisor, which was a key part of the judgement.
Asking a few questions on the website doesn't fulfil that requirement for me.

We seem to be approaching SOA2 with the same arrogant disregard for the FCA & courts that we did the first time.

Words fail me.

Folks, please...

This is Aston Martin.

Let's try to conduct ourselves with the class our brand deserves.

c26 has been here forever, and whatever your feelings about his posts; one thing is certain:

If there really IS bad news on the horizon, c26 will flag that junk up pronto!

What?
Apologies. I meant to say "c26 will appraise you of the impending detrimental narrative which may unfold."

Class!

Q1 results presentation. 6th May 2021
Ken Gregor:
"You can also see the benefits of lower net operating expenses, about £8 million lower in the quarter verse the same quarter a year ago."

Jimmyg56,

Whilst I understand the sentiment, it may not ALL lie at the BoD's door.

They employed what appears to be a highly qualified legal team. When you pay for expertise, you tend to follow their advice.

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. Who knows?

I think those numbers are too optimistic Vinson. I think you've got to base the number of claims somewhere ABOVE the number of votes and below the BoD's estimate of potential claims, and then on FOS upheld ratios. Also be mindful that if we come up with a significantly better package for claimants, it may inspire more of them to 'bother' claiming.

Awesome video. All 3 cars just stunning.

Thanks Tiny.

Agreee with the sentiment here.

Novice mentioned eyebrows, so here's the only thing I raised mine to:
para.40
"The estimated value of the Future Business Contribution is set out in a confidential exhibit to Mr Jennison’s witness statement. The reason it was confidential is that it contains price sensitive information. There is no need to set out the contents of the exhibit here, but I record that the Company’s forecast total Future Business Contribution is materially lower than the amount of Initial Contribution."

It's there now
https://www.amigoscheme.co.uk/docs/AllSchemeltdJudgement.pdf

And when it comes out of auction prepare to be disappointed in your chosen trading platform.

I haven't got time to read the RNA. Give me a summary so I can get on with my busy life.

I don't see a copy of the judgement on www.amigoscheme.co.uk

Anyone?

Whilst I agree it was disappointing to us laypeople that the FCA arguments weren't countered in court, I am fairly sure that this was a strategic decision by our QC.

He was 'unprepared' to answer some very simple questions such as how many shares are in issue. There is NO WAY he didn't know this figure.

It was theatre designed to remind the judge that the FCA's nebulous claims have little relevence to the case, and bring the judge back to the letter of the law.

I hope.

AML_007, in that context it makes sense, it also brings me to my biggest takeaway from this article.

That last photo of the interior. The steering wheel looks terrible (2 different colours) at the (12 o'clock) seam.

IF I were buying an Aston and was presented with this rendering, I might think that a sloppy 'good enough' attitude the their VR software translates similarly to the production of my finished vehicle.

I'd prefer if this was NOT the final software that is to be shown to customers. I'd prefer for our dealerships NOT to have to stand over customers using the hardware, ready to explain that their steering wheel will NOT look like this, and that it's just a limitation of the software.

Luxury goods are all about the detail. The sales material needs to reflect that. Subconcious decisions will be made.

Jonno,
"I think the FCA must have asked them to publish their letter but not FOS - I cannot think of any reason why both letters were not released at the same time."

Mmmm. Can't you?
The moment I saw that "FCA wants shareholder pain" RNS I questioned the motive. Did Amigo HAVE to include the reason in the RNA? I don't think so. I thought it was a set-up between amgo and the FCA to pull the reins back on the share price.

This FOS letter was 2 days before the FCA letter. No RNA. What would have happened to the share price if they had released this?

IK, I've been wondering on the subject. Would you not vote if you thought you may have a claim? I think there will be a number that couldn't be bothered to vote, but will feel emboldened to if the scheme passes. Dunno what that number might be though.
If votes=claims then does our redress package not look 10x better than at did with 1M potential claims?

It says he "opened the doors to his firm’s Gaydon HQ last week " so that would explain this slew of similar articles.

This is the first of these articles to paint TM in anything like a negative light. I wonder if the writer asked some silly question and got a terse response.

Hi, first post here but I enjoy your research.

The information you've provided appears to be accurate.