What is fair compensation? have the FCA proposed a fair figure I don't think so. Is it all the money you are due in a claim? That only works until the money runs out and the company goes bust.... meaning those that haven't yet had any compensation don't get any , so they haven't got there fair share of compensation. What figure would a tribunal come up with? If the company felt this to high it would end up in administration. So the company has set out an affordability figure based on what it see as sustainable for the company while offering all those entitled a fair share.
Maybe setting out a reward scheme before this is settled was wrong. Maybe it should be suspended until after the 4 year point. just my thoughts.
When I first started investing had large chunk in MTFB at 60p ish set a stop loss at 55p, when they failed to get FDA approval , dropped to 6p on opening and that’s where my stop loss kicked in. Lost over £30000 and nearly the wife, I will never set a stop loss or gamble that amount in one share again.
Or maybe, amigo knew that if they announced the vote tomorrow 95% for, the SP would have jumped a bit embarrassing for them (never expected to be this high) and the FCA, so by issuing a damper RNS it saved the embarrassment.
The FCA considers that a fair compromise could have, but in this case has not been, proposed to Scheme Creditors to vote upon. Therefore, and in view of the particular 1
concerns stated above, the FCA has decided that it intends to appear at the Sanction Hearing through counsel to oppose the sanction of the Scheme, even if approved by the requisite majority of Scheme Creditors, on the basis that the Court cannot be satisfied that the Scheme in its current form is fair.
“Still cannot understand why the FCA didn’t object to the vote at the first hearing, if they considered the scheme unfair.” ?
My thoughts, Why didn’t the FCA challenge the scheme as not being fair at the 1st court hearing.?
If they had and the court had decided at the first hearing that the creditors should be allowed to decide via the vote, the decision would be cut and dried, bar box ticking by the court. By delaying there challenge until the second hearing, the outcome is up in the air until court day, which is what has happened, at least the FCA has the last input. But this comes down to the creditors were given the details of the scheme and have voted for it .... so the court should uphold their vote.
Everything the FCA stated in today’s letter in the RNS, could have ... should have been stated in the last court hearing before the vote. Why say we won’t object, to then turn round and say we do. They should have objected before the vote, then a suitable agreement could have been agreed for creditors to vote on? Seems a very strange thing to do?
RE: Up we go again, massive bid down here. Auction now11 May 2021 10:54
I read the RNS this morning and thought “ up we go” how wrong was I. Panicked was going to sell , finger hovering..... then it dropped to 17 odd and I hit the button .... on buy .... wow what a morning.
Sharebel, this is why I expect more news, if he had ramped and sold the The grief he’s getting now would be threefold. So he played down the RNS to allow him to sell, without being accused of selling in a spike. If good news comes now there will be know reason for a subsequent drop. GLA