Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
The London-listed company said an independent valuer of its portfolio had “materially reduced” its assessment of industry-wide royalty payments after a decision last year by the US Copyright Royalty Board to recalculate the rate.
So a group of musicians sold the rights to their catalogues of music for top dollar, then the copyright royalty board reduces earnings a few months later ( Was that anticipated) Then the lower priced assets after all the musicians had got their money out pre price review.This needs investigating.If this was on the cards isn’t it a form of insider trading ? Just asking !
What did this team pay for the dings to their friends in the industry ? Are they selling them for less than they paid ? Or more than they paid ? That’s a very important point ?
These block of songs will have an expected income stream which is important…If they are in the market they must not sell if they have lost confidence they should go away.
Only sell the company not the assets….Or someone will be cherry picking
I’m not really sure this is actually subprime it used to be 1% bad debt of below was Prime 2%-5% Near Prime and 5%Plus Sub-Prime.Guarantor loans perform like Prime due to the Guarantor..Thats why this is the most profitable form of consumer finance.High rates low bad debt.
The other point was people move through the various stages as life time issues like redundancy,illness or a marriage break up.Most People tend not to need these higher rates all of the time.What I understood is that just like a car accident your insurance premiums go up and similarly loan rates go up when you miss a few payments due to the normal life accidents that tend to happen to everyone.....I rambled a bit there....
Can someone explain if this is correct.I borrow £10,000 for a loan and it gets accepted.I pay £15,000 back and then state I couldn’t afford it and the claims management company gets 25% or £3750 the customer who had had the £10,000 already also gets his £11,250 back so he is £10,000 up because he lied on his application form!!!! Are you sure this isn’t about someone at The FCA being a little envious of colleagues leaving and getting some upside from share options....All Written without just like watching a Hit**** film episode trying to guess who did it to who ?
JB said most of the Amigo Loan customers who are claiming mis-sold loans lied in their application forms so they are borrowing money by deceit, keeping the money and getting paid out the money back they had paid.That’s twice the money as a loan and the money back as a refund.The FCA a said they wouldn’t apples the scheme which is deceitful as they have.
I am a small shareholder who believes my word is my bond.Something doesn’t sit comfortably with me, that I as a shareholder will be paying out from my hard earned cash because of people being devious.The judge and the FCA clearly have a view that Amigo customers need protecting from the world as they are half wits but they aren’t .They are the General public the debt performs just like a prime portfolio.Any claimant for mis selling should be counter claimed for deception for the original loan to be repaid.The Judge needs to understand this point.The customers have had the loans,wanting their repayments back,and the only place it looks as if it’s coming from is The shareholders that are also in this instance the general public.
The Judge seemed to have a better understanding than the Board of the financial structure and the idea of a debt for equity solution didn’t appear to be “Off The Cuff” and I wonder if he had already had meetings with The FSA about this prior to the hearing.
I’m not clear but once the bond holders have been repaid how much is left to pay the claimants ? Is there enough left to pay them off completely ? If any of the facilities are in breach isn’t today’s tone going to encourage them to take control of the company tomorrow ? The potential bluff of Administration could happen sooner than the FCA or Judge anticipates.
To be honest I’m disappointed that The Board didn’t have a better answer for the judge when it came to alternatives.All the possible alternatives should have been discussed with council and the board before today and a better response should have been given.It’s almost like no one had questioned the board about alternatives.The Non Executives should be replaced as they didn’t help the board anticipate all possible questioning by The Judge.Whilst I was only listening to the discussion via ISAs excellent interpretation it was clear to me that Amigos Council and The Board were like rabbits caught in headlights.
They are a top drawer team but they didn’t do a great job today....
The main reason for loans being missold is affordability.The court case could grow arms and legs if it’s not careful.The banks and government have just made millions of loans to people and many of them are classed as unaffordable.Are they all going to be written off as Missold loans ! The claims management companies will be going after the Government unless someone clips their wings !
The principal that all claims should be honoured regardless of time has already been debated at length....If the FSA wants claims to continue at 100% they need to reopen the thousands of claims for PPI that have been declined due to a time limit.If they argue and win the PPi claims will have to restart and open it up again many banks and finance companies won’t survive.
I would have thought that Amigo fits better into Provident than the other way around.It will give Provident Amigos portfolio to cross sell into,there could be symbiotic advantages for 2 huge data bases coming together.
A question about Guarantor Loans where the guarantor states they didn’t agree to be guarantor as mentioned in the Motley Fool report ! Doesn’t This mean the Amigo contract was signed by someone other than the guarantor, isn’t this classed as fraud either by the guarantor or the principal borrower.shouldn’t a customer who confirms they have committed a fraud be introduced to their local police for investigation ?
So Bybrook could provide the capital to take it off market and JP Morgan the warehouse facility for it to start lending again.If there is so much upside which there is...Without the complaints this is a sub prime yield of 40% costs of 5% bad debt of 10% so 25% profit if the warehouse facility was lending at 80% that’s 5 to 1 on 25% return or 125%.VCs and hedge funds take note this is the best kept secret and has already made JB very wealthy its just about to make GJ even richer !
That’s if they have any funding lines in place.They would need them if they were to start lending again.So the other possibility is these investors are the new founders for any new lending.The % they have is small beer to these lenders.
Do you know who holds the funding lines / warehouse facilities.Effectively there will be a funding source and that funding source will allow Amigo to utilise let’s say 80% of any debt and 20% of capital.However with the complaints coming thick and fast that 20% would of eroded sometime ago so a bank or funder will be exposed for 100% of their warehouse facility ! If they are in breach of any covenants which I think they must have been I wonder if these banks with funding lines are the banks that are buying stakes...If I had £100M exposure I guess taking a few shares control is a way of de risking it somewhat.I’m surprised they don’t have someone on the board !
JB will be interested as will the management as will a number of competitors.I’m not sure who the warehouse facilities are but they will be close to the story they could protect them
Selves by taking it private.Amigo is a money making machine.
Surely the management (BOD) are tempted to talk to a VC or one of the new large share holders about taking the company private.The moment they start building the book at 39.9 APR and very little bad debt the value of the company will go up very quickly as the debt rises!