The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
With the exception of MIC, (who were selling before it even went to court) I think it’s pretty telling that BB/JPM haven’t sold. And the fact that MIC did shows that shrewd people are buying.
The BOD has hopefully now realised that their hardball approach, only ruffled feathers.
The future looks brighter (IMO) any act to actively force the company into insolvency would be investigated. None of the BOD would want their names/legacy tarnished with that!
GLA - Thorpe park would be proud of a rollercoaster like this. Fasttrac tickets selling cheap.
(Bloody auto correct on iPhone)
Either exception of MIC, (who were selling before it even went to court) I think it’s pretty telling that BB/JPM haven’t sold. Amg the fact that MIC did shows that shrewd people are buying.
The BOD has hopefully not realised that their hardball approach, only ruffled feathers.
The future looks brighter (IMO) any act to actively force the company in to insolvency would be investigated. None of the BOD would want their names/legacy tarnished with that!
GLA - Thorpe park would be proud of a rollercoaster like this. Fasttrac tickets selling cheap.
all those on here calling this as a dead duck are just trying to spook others, the truth of the situation is if AMGO are insolvent then this would stand up at appeal stage, and overturn the judgement. if how ever it is not insolvent then its not a dead duck. it might be wounded but by no means dead.
The outcome was a result of the BOD trying to play hard ball, which I understand, but the skill is knowing when you have the upper hand or not,
The judge refers to lack of information from the BOD, was this a strategic move, to either hide the fact that its not insolvent, or was it a play to let the FCA think they have had there day at court, and at appeal they show to true state of the business?
all will be revealed in the latest saga of a game of loans,
whether in or out GLA.
good point @specialonek,
the BOD can make a point without crashing the market (if its rejected), if the fca reject it proves BOD point, if the FCA approve it has the same effect!
how any of you can say nothing has changed is beyond me. we now know a RI is needed, and know that the judge discussed debt for equity and holding in trust etc. the FCA were gunning for shareholders.
I know you have to hold your position at court, but it feels like we (AMGO) are acting like a petulant child stamping its feet.
any one saying they are planning on buying (who hasn't go disposable cash) is MAD.
imho
Some of the comments on this BB make me ashamed to be a shareholder. We are fractional holders of shares. We as collective share holder put the control of the company into the BOD. Trust in them that they know better than all on here what’s best for the company. And if you don’t agree, sell or vote accordingly at an AGM.
We all knew the risks and took the risks.
GLA
I feel sorry for the judge, would not want to be him.
If the SOA is approved it sets a precedent and customers will call fail.
If he suggests a revisit, the market will crash on reopening (which it would) taking away the value they discussed today.
When it came to the second vote the voters would feel that Amigo is cash rich (FCA portrayed as that) and due more than could ever be offered. Thus reducing the chance of a positive outcome.
If an debt for equity swap was forced this sets a dangerous precedent going forwards for all shareholders of any company.
Forcing a RI without a strong business (Amgo2) runs the risk of failing, and also SP crashes.
Reject the SOA and the administration would happen (at some point)
The only middle ground is to approve, but with a larger contribution.
Or force a RI but include approval for 2.0 for the market.
- one other point that might not have been raised-
If A RI is needed for 2.0 (regardless of SOA) the LTIP if unadjusted becomes harder to accomplish this automatically moving the goalpost (which is better short term)
@nursesteve, a stop loss is no guarantee that you will get your figure. If this is a no (I hope not) the market will open at the bottom and all stop losses will trigger at the price the market set. Unless it becomes apparent that Administration is 100% in court I would be wary of stop losses!
Not advice and do your own research but I’ve been caught out in past only to see the market recover in minutes
I agree with this afternoon’s comments regarding speculation of the SP. but I also think everyone should remember that most if not all of the shareholders would sooner increase value based on company’s making profit. None of us look to invest based on loses’s to customers. But in the same regard we as shareholders are also there to support companies when times are hard. We’ve probably all been through risky fund raises. - without a free market the markets die. Either way good luck all. Please try not to rise to the vermin that are surely going to appear tomorrow.
Nice to see JPM playing with 0.1% to ‘spook’ the market. Been waiting for that type of RNS - suggests to me that the outlook is good.
GLA
Have we had the skilled persons report yet?
Looking on the Amigo website, it says the FCA have seen the draft but not finalised yet.
Is that correct or is the website out of date? If correct will we see this before Wednesday?
It’s quite comical this board. I personally haven’t blocked anyone. I find it funny how you can predict the next comment coming and from who!! Sad but funny!
GLA only one more day, assuming there isn’t an RNS tomorrow.
any one thinking this is going into administration think again.
taken directly from the FCA letter.
-------------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
1concerns stated above, the FCA has decided that it intends to appear at the Sanction ------
the FCA know what they want from it , its just a case of thrashing out their ONE concern to some common ground.
The more I’ve thought about the FCA’s position the more I feel they have played a blinder!
They, like us don’t want AMIGO to fail. If they had raised the same concerns Pre or during the vote. Then the aggrieved nay sayers would have created more noise and fuss and the vote would have had more chances of being a NO, this would have resulted in administration for sure. No good for any one. The FCA knows this. Also if the had gone after the LTIP early doors, would the board been so inclined (I’m sure they would have) to do what’s right? Thus also increasing the risk of administration. The board prior to a YES vote would have also argued that the LTIP was needing to help them steady the ship.
But once the YES vote was received the FCA knew administration was no longer on the cards, so didn’t matter the statement words. All their concern is now, is to improve the fund amount to the customers. HOW do they do that? They move the LTIP goalposts to push the company to be bigger and faster. And now the board who can see it’s nearly over the line are actually the ones with the most to lose (in negotiations)
Fair play to the FCA just one big game of chess to get the best of a bad situation
Thanks pantherpat, ......
Regarding the the £5 . I actually was merely asking. Are you sure? I didn’t have an opinion as to it being wrong! I’m fully aware if the future potential, just wasn’t thinking £5.
Regarding the selling cheaply comment, I guess I should have added the words (is choosing to sell) I can only comment from my point of view, I held more than 10k (way more) and as were purchased in an ISA have no option to add the extra funds needed. Without selling something. Regarding the excess shares agree these are not guaranteed but a high probability there will be some. I feel it’s prudent to ensure you have enough capital to take potentially what’s on offer.