Member Info for Spikeyj

sean, he doesn't seem to say whether he is heavily invested long, or heavily short?

personally, i would stick to the term "investment", since that is the word being used in the quob updates. seems most likely, it is a share of the equity in some kind of business. (but not unreasonable for someone else to refer to that as an 'asset'?) ... re clock's 11:04 post, i've highlighted with capitals the bit which specifically refers to warrants for quob, as below, just in case clock might like to refresh his own reading: "We previously announced that if Daniel Stewart were unable for any reason to take this key step, Quob Park Estate would use its own Daniel Stewart stock to carry out such an investment, provided that we believed the stock would go to responsible holders. QUOB PARK ESTATE WOULD BENEFIT FROM THE WARRANTS OUTLINED ABOVE, whilst also targeting a return of no less than 50% for our investment within 12 months. We have therefore escrowed an investment deal that utilises Daniel Stewart shares that we hold (up to the value of £900k based on 3.35p per share) as part of a circa £2.5m investment package. As a result, we shall shortly be announcing a change in our holding in Daniel Stewart to circa 6.1%, once the escrowed investment deal is completed." of course,'utilising' Dan shares means selling them to the vendor in part-exchange for this unspecified investment, plus additional cash. i note that RT is bending over backwards not to use the word 'sell'. nonetheless, that's why the holdings RNS will show a reduction. as to whether or not that's good news for quob holders, who knows, since we have no sight yet of the actual financials and specifics. in terms of effects for Dan holders, seems simply that RT selling some Dan to an as yet unnamed third party, whose intentions are unknown.

u sure?

will probably reappear soon as new head of FIFA, lol.

yes, i think so, RT's purchase will come with some partial guarantees from whoever is selling to him. i've no idea at all what the actual 'investment' is, I've seen zero info about it, not even the sector. tho' RT of course claims expertise re 'digital disruption'?

hi jp. i don't think there is enough information available to make a sensible guess, so i will pass on that, thanks. I'm neutral overall on this one (- i think unlike rhambo & ericeric who are seem pretty bearish.) if they are just plugging the bad debt hole with a placing and that's basically all there is to it, then probably the share goes lower. i don't think Dan is likely to sparkle just from it's existing businesses & current cost control. but there certainly are some moderately big fish (/sharks?) who may want to use Dan as a vehicle by which to bring overseas /unlisted assets into a London listed stock market vehicle. and if they manage to pull off a big deal or two of that sort, alongside managing /reducing the debt within the exiting business, then it's AIM, people could get excited & buy. this is a relatively illiquid, thinly traded stock, so if there is some deal-making news that seems good on initial view, then the sp could move up pretty sharply. (tho' similar issue would apply in reverse if sp starts falling on bad news, would not be easy to get out while others were also selling.) but it's very difficult to gauge quite how real those prospects really are, hence I won't hazard a guess. a fair bit is known about RT and his style, a marmite kinda fellah, but there seems to be very very little info publicly available about epsilon & what's its really like. atb anyway.

sorry, last bit of post cut off. should end: I will *appear* to have become the owner of a £30K car, & will *appear* to have sold my QPP for a big profit. & they will *appear* to have become the owner of a block of shares that seems twice as valuable as it really is, just so long as their books reflect the *acquisition* cost rather than a more accurate mark to market price. overall, it makes the deal appear bigger than it really was.

catch, no, it would *not* be compensation from RT. it's the other way round, they will give him some additional shares if they break certain conditions. it's not about him underwriting the value of Dan shares. "Daniel Stewart’s Board were supportive of making an investment that we had highlighted to them, valued at circa £900k, using its stock valued at 3.35p per share. Due to complications surrounding the temporary suspension of its shares, and with Daniel Stewart’s efforts focussed on their current fundraise, they were unable to proceed with the investment within the necessary time scale. This was a significant disappointment to Quob Park Estate, as working with Daniel Stewart, we had been able to negotiate warrants to protect the future value of such an investment. These warrants ensured that an investor using any form of capital (including cash or Daniel Stewart stock valued at 3.35p per share) would have the value of their investment effectively underwritten for up to three years." In the last sentence, 'an investor using any form of capital' in this instance means RT/quob, using about £1.6m cash plus shares for about 3.8% of Dan. i'm not sure what you mean by RT having an interest in 9.9% after he has sold down to 6.1%. once he's transferred the beneficial ownership to whoever this investment vendor is, RT will just own 6.1%, not 9.9%. i can see that you don't get what i mean about the share sale price that the deal is being booked at. sorry, not sure i can explain it any clearer for you. maybe one more try: suppose i bought a car from someone that is worth about £20K on the real, traded market. I could just pay them £20K cash. or I could pay £10K in cash, plus another £10K worth of shares. so let's suppose I offer them £10Kcash, plus 10,000 QPP shares, which are trading for around £1 now. nice and straightforward, deal worth £20K -- i end up with the car, & they end up with £20K worth of cash and shares. (perhaps also they give me a 'warranty' of some freebie car parts if the exhaust falls off within 3 years.) so far so good. BUT, we could agree instead that although I will still give them £10K cash & 10,000 QPP shares, we will price the QPP shares **for the purpose of this particular deal** as being £2 per share, i.e. double what qpp have really been trading at recently. nothing changes about what we each end up with - I still get the same car, they still get same amount of cash & same amount of qpp shares. the thing that does change is in our respective accounts, our book-keeping: I will *appear* to have become the owner of a £30K car, & will *appear* to have sold my QPP for a big profit. & they will *appear* to have become the owner of a block of shares that seems twice as valuable as it really is, just so long as their books

.... it might be rather high risk not to agree, since that might be akin to voting down the placing as a whole, if a large chunk of the money is indeed to come from some current large shareholder (could it be epsilon?) ... potentially a way of epsilon trying to take control of the company without having to pay a premium..

would pis holding these shares be ok to vote for a whitewash waiver if a current large Dan holder does apply for one to go over 30%? from wikipedia: "Whitewash Resolution is a proposed resolution for the waiver of rights of independent shareholders to receive a mandatory takeover from the investor and its concert parties for the ordinary shares of the company not already owned or controlled by them. A whitewash waiver is a corporate law concept originating in Hong Kong and Singapore. In some cases an investor will apply to the Executive for the Whitewash Waiver, which, if granted, will be subject to the approval of independent shareholders."

catch, i will comment as i wish. it's not your bulletin bb. you seem to be a bit muddled about who has been given what warrants. if one believes what quob has written, it's *not* RT that has provided warrants to the buyer of his Dan shares; rather, the vendor of the 'investment', whatever it is, has given some kind of undertaking *to quob* that if within three years from the deal taking place it does one or more of three things, namely: ".... the warrants guaranteed that additional shares would have to be issued to the investor in the event that the company being invested into: [1] converted any of its debt into equity [2] raised additional capital at a lower price [3] sold material parts of its business or assets at a price lower than the valuation the investment was based upon. ... so the warrants are not a benefit for Dan pis, and not a benefit for the vendor of the investment. rather they are a benefit for Quob. note also the phrase used, "To a large extent ..." RT is not revealing the precise terms of the deal, for example he does not state how many new shares the vendor would have to issue in the event of 1-3 above. note also, the warrants do not guarantee RT that the value of the 'investment' will not fall, just that there will be some degree of compensation if any of [1] to [3] above occur. why is the investment vendor doing this? because RT is giving them £1.6 million cash, and something like 3.8% of Dan, selling his Dan stake down to 2/3 of current. but no matter what RT claims the Dan stake is worth, regardless of the price that they wrote on the contract, the value of the Dan stake to the investment vendor will simply be what the market will offer them if they tried to offload them. (contrary to your 13:44, RT is not giving them any guarantee or 'warrants' about the price they could get for those Dan shares.) RT says that he believes that the investment vendor will be 'responsible', but he does not say that any kind of lock-in has been negotiated to stop that entity from selling off the Dan shares it gets from RT. (obviously, I don't know if they will, but nothing's announced that would prevent it either.) it's a similar issue re RT's "intention"to buy more Dan shares. maybe he will, maybe he won't --- saying that he would be 'potentially' able to buy back above 6.1% again is not a legal obligation anyone could hold him to. i would agree, if these shares do start trading again, & RT *does* quickly buy back up to 9.9% again, then sure, that would be a genuine bullish sign about his real opinion on Dan. but what RT has just announced is about selling 1/3 of his stake.

jptop, time will tell whether RT will actually buy any more dan. he has indicated that he might "potentially" do so, but of course that is not a cast iron guarantee that he will do that. (.... this is the guy who said he was buying more qpp shares, when he was actually dumping his shares by pledging them as security for la oan, with no intention to redeem them.) so maybe RT will buy more, if Dan comes out of suspension. or maybe he won't. toss a coin. it's a nice bit of spin from RT to claim that his deal for this investment for quob includes selling a Dan chunk that is worth "£900k based on 3.35p per share". - in reality, both RT and the vendor know that the block of Dan shares that RT has offloaded is worth half that, at best. (he might as well have said, 'it's worth £9million based on 33.5p.')

good evening profit. i've said before what my agenda is, this is an interesting share to watch. that's enough for me, thanks.

thanks, very interesting. so Dan turned down RT's suggested investment opportunity? & Dan turned down RT's offer to help finance their 500K 'unexpected' bad debt. & in response, RT is now offloading a wodge of his Dan shares to an unspecified 3rd party, in exchange for Quob buying into whatever that deal of the century is directly. RT now warns that there will be a holdings announcement soon showing that quob's beneficial interest in Dan has gone down, because of the 'escrowed' shares Rob is selling. nice way to get round the suspension, RT. and the comfort for Dan investors? RT reminds shareholders that once he's dumped some of his holding like this, it leaves him free to "potentially" buy more again. an interesting / careful choice of word. good luck holders.

http://www.quobpark.com/blog/update-on-daniel-stewart-and-quob-park-estates-investment includes: "Quob Park Estate investors that are interested in Imaginatik Plc (IMTK) can also expect an open letter to IMTK’s board before year end, predicated on them releasing an RNS on contract renewals before the end of the year to clarify their cash position."

thanks.

may i ask, are you particularly looking on week to week closes, or end of day patterns? ( afraid i'm not much a t/a guy myself)

yes, i think you mentioned something pretty similar a month ago. based on what?

can't wait! deckchair, binoculars & pimms at the ready.

look forward to it ; )