Member Info for Stoopid

The sooner this CAT tribuneral delivers its judgement the better, hopefully (and more than likely) a positive judgement.

Paypoint are materially undervalued here (when CAT is resolved with no or minor consequences), after the recent consolidation and buybacks, the share base is down to 62.3m. In the trading update to come, based on the new share base, EPS could easily hit 80p - 90p a share and 100p EPS next year as the buyback programme continues.

With current EPS predictions of 78 - 90 pence per share and a P/E multiple of only 10 that is suggesting PAY are materially undervalued, possibly by as much as 80/90%.

Apparently some one has made an offer to buy Inpost (Paypoint own 4.5% of Yodel). Now whilst not material, where it may make an impact is that Paypoint runs the COLLECT+ network which is heavily reliant on Inpost and Yodel. So, it could all be about volumes and contracts...

If any new owner expands Inpost services, Paypoint could benefit from increased transactions fees and/or better contract terms. Conversely, it could be the opposite.

Paypoint are materially undervalued at the moment especially with the large reduction in the share base due to the buybacks and £50m share price consolidation (12/13). The question is, will shorts hold out up to the trading update at the end of the month. If its good and shows all back on track to 100+ EBITDA with rising revenues etc, could be a bit of a sharp share price rise. Also, still awaiting the result of the CAT hearing. Aother possible big price catalyst.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-06/inpost-gets-indicative-proposal-for-acquisition-of-company

The other point I would make is, cant the FCA can require compensation to consumers if they have been treated unfairly, regardless of private law liability because the FCA is not enforcing or dealing with Supreme Court judgments; it is exercising its own statutory powers i.e. Redress powers (s.404 FSMA & related rules). Yes they would have to step carefully and make sure the redress scheme is tied to customer loss but they could do this by nartrowing the scope of the criteria for redress?

I still think the FCA will water down its scheme enough to keep banks etc from requesting a judicial review and still provide a level of payout to please the public?

But surely with the Clydesdale case, any appeal to the supreme court would require a new point of law or clear/total misintrepretation of the law as the Hopecraft, Johnson, Wrench case clarified the legal principles regarding commissions/fiducairy duty etc essentially covering what was in the clydesdale case?

i.e. The Clydesdale Bank case was about whether banks could be held liable for undisclosed dealer commissions in car finance. After the Supreme Court clarified the law, only the “unfair relationship” claims remain.

So, if the scheme is unfair/unfavourable, the banks would have to request a judicial review? No?

Also, Global365s own internal documents show that a quality assurance tester within Global-365 described their own SMARTprepay software as a "complicated Frankenstein mess" in a 2021 email. The email was cited to highlight internal concerns about the product's fundamental problems.

If these media reports are true, it is hightly unlikely that PAY will face significant liabilities and may even win the case.

This appears just to be a load of crap from CHATGPT regarding the funding of global 365s claim.

And, given that PayPoint have already settled the Utilita case and introduced new contracts, the commercial and competitive position is defensible.

Unless Global‑365 can show that the alleged Market Dominance and Abusive behavior actually harmed competition and there were actual measurable, quantifiable losses, the CAT is unlikely to award large damages to Global.

Historical precedents suggest that stand-alone UK competition damages claims rarely result in big payouts unless there is a clear regulator-backed infringement, which there clearly isnt in this case and the fact that Global365 say they are confident of winning is just crap and bluster in AI generated document/response.

Its strongly through 500 as well, currently sitting at 515 live price, up 4.37%

Big rises the last couple of days? Yet, no news?

The recent slump, aside from the financial figures and weakness in EBITDA/FCF, is likely also due to the upcoming CAT Tribunal decision.

Will be exceedingly bad if any decision goes against Paypoint. Could result in substantial/material compensation/redress.

On the flip side, it will result in a significant share price rise if they win, big short squeeze.

Yes, but the fear then was bankruptcy due to the FCA redress scheme and figures of "CBG will have to pay £1.5 Billion" bandied around, and the SP fell because of this, not just the divi cancellation. It is wrong to correlate it to the large SP fall, the fear of bankruptcy/massive liabilities did that.

Knot, I know im more a fan of a return to dividends than you are but, would a reinstatement of the divi say of around 40/45p not cause the share price to rise substantially as the income funds would see a yield of 8% - 10% as attractive and pile in hence the yield would compress as the share price rose therefore possibly creating a short squeeze and a re-rating?

I know the main news will be when the redress scheme and final liabilities are finalised but surely a return to divis would be a good thing?

PAY are well undervalued in relation to their current metrics and the medium/long term business plan. An EBITDA of £100m is expected, the share consolidation already has the number of shares down to 62.87m. A low forward enterprise value for them would be approx 6.6 and with net debt of approx £80m and 62.8m shares that gives a suggested share price of somewhere between £8 and £9.5. Thats double the current share price.

One of the things hanging over them is the CAT Judgement, another is that its going to taker longer to get to 100m EBITDA. Yet another is the unexpected underperformance of Obcnnect and the parcels business.

The current divi yield is an excellent 7% but thats from a price/cap thats at a 5 year low. So, im happy to hold and take the divis, might be a while to wait for 850 again though....

Https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/uk-car-finance-redress-plan-puts-2026-payout-jeopardy-sources-say-2025-12-12/

Here is the missing end bit to add more context regarding legal challanges etc, rather than the article just seem like there is a problem and the bill is going to climb

Some industry members and lawmakers say that current proposals are unreasonable and inconsistent with a Supreme Court judgment in August, noting the plan's lengthy time period introduces operational complexities.

The dispute centres in part on the FCA's definition of excessive commissions and its decision to label as unfair all "tied relationships", where dealerships introduce clients exclusively to lenders.

One of the sources said some in the industry felt the FCA had got its maths wrong, that shareholders would want to exhaust all legal options and that a 20 billion pound figure, "based on crude maths", was a "great negotiating number" to take directly to the finance ministry.

DID CUSTOMERS SUFFER LOSSES?

The industry is also questioning whether the scheme's methodology reflects actual losses to customers - partly because some dealerships used commissions they earned to offer discounts for vehicle purchases.

Adrian Dally, director of motor finance at the Finance and Leasing Association, the lobby group leading the industry response, called for a quick resolution for everyone treated unfairly.

But he added: "For the redress scheme to be credible, it must only compensate those customers who have suffered loss."

Some lenders are taking their argument to the government, hoping for a sympathetic ear after British finance minister Rachel Reeves in January considered intervening in a landmark car loan mis-selling lawsuit. That was an effort to shield the motor finance industry, which accounts for 80% of new car sales.

BMW's financial services unit told Reuters it was in direct contact with the FCA and the government, while Santander UK's outgoing CEO Mike Regnier has called for government intervention and "material changes" to the proposals.

A finance ministry spokesperson said only that stakeholders should take part in the consultation and that the ministry wants the issue to be resolved in a way that provides "certainty for consumers and firms".

Bendipa1;

Whilst I appreciate your point of view, you are actually posting some factual inaccuracies. The PAY share price hasnt been over 900 for over 5 years now, way back on about the 02nd Jan 2020. There is also no evidence to support your "shorters favourite", the short interest has never gotten above 1.65%ish and is usually relatively low. That is not to suggest there is no price manipulation and things going on in the background. The recent downgrade to EBITDA was unexpected and has been taken advantage of as the market were expecting an EBITDA of £100m for 2026/7.

Whilst you say 25k shares is a significant amount, Nick WIles CEO is a multi millionaire and £125k is probably a drop in the ocean for him. He used to work as an investment banker for Casenove before they were bought out by Morgan Stanley and has been on the boards of a number of listed companies. So, hes worth a few quid and whilst good to see him buying, and a vote of confidence, it doesnt mean that things are "rosy" and we will see a quick return to 600/800+ share price.

The court case IS an issue until the judgement is handed down because it leads to uncertainty and that if the judgement goes against PAY, however unlikely, it means they could be facing significant liabilities and a multi million pound settlement. This would hamstring PAY and require them to possibly damages.

The divi, you say, is too high at the moment. That is not true, when the recent share consolidation (12 for 13) occurred the dividend was not increased accordingly in line with the reduced number of shares. So the dividend has actually been reduced already in real terms for holders who did not buy back shares with their 50p dividend by about 8%.

The company is still finishing its transitioning from the legacy business to the new "digital" business. The Romanian business was exited 5 years ago, they bought out Love 2 Shop 2/3 years ago which is why there is a significant debt pile currently. Obconnect hasnt brought in the revenues projected, parcels business has also had a few problems recently.

I have owned shares in PAY for quite a while and seen highs and lows over the last few years. At least get the details right if you are going to tell me "how it is" with Paypoint.

So, just because the CEO bought a few shares doesnt mean there isnt an issue. One issue is that PAY are still awaiting the outcome of the CAT. PAY it appears, is being shorted aggressively and as it is a thinly traded share, it will be easy for unknown parties behind the scenes to move the price around. The other issue is obviously the delay in hitting an EPS of 100 per share relating to current trading.

Saying that, although the internet reports/presented evidence is in Paypoints favour, the decision from the CAT is still to be handed down and it could take a while yet before this occurs (Already been 5 months) and may either be favourable or unfavourable. I have no doubt this is also weighing on the shares despite media reports saying the claim wont go anywhere.

As noted previously;

"The Defense: PayPoint's counsel, Josh Holmes KC, claimed Global 365's argument that they had a viable product was a "red herring". He referenced an internal Global 365 email from a quality assurance tester in 2021 that described their own SMARTprepay software as a "complicated Frankenstein mess" to support the argument that the product was not market-ready."

https://www.catribunal.org.uk/cases/15975723-global-365-plc-another

Manfor, youve never posted in this chat before may I ask what you actually know about PAYPOINT and whats actually going on in this case?

Also, just so you are aware PayPoint have consistently denied the allegations, arguing that its contracts did not prevent competitors from bidding for work. PayPoint's expert evidence suggested that energy companies simply were not interested in Global 365's product, describing it in court as a "Frankenstein mess". PayPoint have always maintained it would successfully defend the claim.

Unfortunately, its been 4/5 months now and we are still awating the CAT (Competition Appeal Triburnal) decision to be handed down.

This case is not for over £200m, its for up to £172.2m and its unlikely full damages would be awarded unless everything is settled in the plaintifs favour, which according to the evidence, is unlikely. Paypoint have also settled with OFGEM and Utilitaria previously over this and media/internet reports suggest the current litigation is unlikely to succeed.

The trial has already concluded in July 2025 and we are awaiting the judgement. Quick case synopsis below.

Exclusionary Contracts: Global-365 presented evidence that PayPoint's use of exclusivity clauses in contracts with major energy suppliers "effectively prevented" them from entering the market.

Market Share Projections: The claimants argued that, absent the anti-competitive conduct, they would have achieved a significant market share and incumbency status, which they now claim is lost.

Ofgem's Provisional Findings: Global-365 leveraged the fact that the energy regulator Ofgem had provisionally concluded in 2021 that PayPoint abused its dominant position, leading to a settlement where PayPoint agreed to remove the clauses and pay into a redress fund, although there was no formal finding of infringement.

PayPoint's Counter-Evidence:

Product Viability: PayPoint's counsel and experts presented evidence arguing that Global-365's product was not viable or market-ready for large energy suppliers at the relevant time. They pointed to internal emails where the software was allegedly described as a "complicated Frankenstein mess".

Alternative Opportunities: PayPoint argued that Global-365 had opportunities to contract with other energy companies (like Scottish Power, British Gas, EDF, and Octopus) or other payment networks (like Payzone or the Post Office) but failed to do so due to the unsuitability of its product or commercial choices, not PayPoint's actions.

No Causal Link: The defence sought to demonstrate that there was no causal link between their contracts and Global-365's alleged losses.

I would worry less about PAY hitting the number of shares bought/cancelled and more about them hitting their medium financial tarets - 100p EPS and debt reduction (taken on during the Love2shop buyout) by 2026/2027 as part of their medium/long term financial plan.

Obconnect https://obconnect.io/ isnt returning the profits they hoped at present, looks like that might take another 6/12 months to generate better profits. There have been issues integrating all the parcels functions resulting in a drop in revenue from the parcels business, but that has now been sorted.. But overall, this current share price slaughter is well overdone.

Still a case of jam tomorrow for those that can wait a while....

Well, that is the reason for the sharp drop in price. Blackrock selling shenanagins. They have dropped the number of shares they own directly to 3.1% but have increased their financial instruments (a CFD for 1.15% and other securities which total 2.01%, up from 0.8%) and as such they still have a total declarable intrest of 5.11%. Shenanagins......

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/PAY/holdings-in-company-zxbbg2kte3d78c3.html

https://uk.investing.com/news/company-news/blackrock-reduces-stake-in-paypoint-to-511-93CH-4394721

Paypoint exits the FTSE 250

https://www.lse.co.uk/news/PAY/wpp-set-for-ftse-100-relegation-princes-shawbrook-poised-to-join-250-5tci7kvglbugnmc.html

Thank you Trotsky, hadnt spotted that....