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.
It would make more sense for a wealthy individual or group to take the Company private by Scheme of Arrangement then it could be reorganised and floated publicly again once it was working profitably. That would require shareholder approval, but judging from the comments below, that shouldn't be difficult to obtain if a modest increase in the sp was offered.
Didn't your MCL insider say "£1 each"? :-)
Let's hope that the next RNS announces that an underwriter has been found for the RI since the threat of a FCA fine has been withdrawn. That would make NewCo an investible proposition for institutionals, and the share price would be supported in anticipation of the business returning to profit. Fingers crossed!
Jedclampit - we're all in a similar position due to the lack of information being provided.
Another thing which puzzles me is the lack of a predatory bid for a company which is now only worth £12m? It was once valued at £1.3bn when it was up and running. It's value has fallen by 99%. Large investment companies would find £45m down the back of their leather sofas. Why have none made a move if Amigo is so near to getting back to business? Perhaps the setup costs of a new lender are so low that a potential market entrant would rather start a new company which has no history? Perhaps there are vultures waiting to pick up the pieces if we fail?
Fingers crossed that there's life in Amigo and the existing shareholders have the last laugh :-)
My average is 5.4p
The cost of an abortive RI would be a dead loss for the creditors, so the Board need an underwritten RI to go ahead without risking being found negligent in their duties as Company Directors.
ppopp, but the concern is that if Amigo is so less profitable that it cannot find a backer for the RI then it can be as safe an investment as the FCA require it to be with 100% of its assets liquidated into cash, but in administration and that cash destined to be distributed amongst the bondholders and those people (and their guarantors) who took out loans without realising that they had to repay the money.
There are two issues which concern me: 1 Amigo seems to be held to a higher/different standard than the payday loan operators on TV, 2 if the FCA regulations are so onerous that Amigo cannot operate at a sufficient profit margin to make the buiness attractive they will not find the underwriter for the RI. The former profit margin was 30% gross. The majority of the former operating cost was Staff at around 70% of total. That is normal for customer facing businesses, however, an increase in administration cost without any tangible return, due to FCA bureaucractic demands, could reduce the former 30% margin considerably and make the business unattractive to shareholders. I am a long term holder of Amigo shares, and will hold until the RI terms are published before making a decision. We are just left hoping that the FCA have not undermined the business model. As they say in the City, "Hope is not an investment strategy".
Something which I find frustrating is that Amigo are now so restricted by the conditions laid down by the FCA that they are only able to approve a small proportion of loan application they receive - according to the latest RNS. Meanwhile, payday loan firms advertise on TV with APRs up to 99%, high street banks charge customers 40% for unsecured loans, and UK credit card issuers charge people 25% or more for authorised lending/unsettled balances. As a second tier lender Amigo charging 49% is not usuary yet the FCA still apply a dead hand to proceedings. My conclusion is that the FCA are over-zealous when it comes to regulating Amigo, and negligent when it comes to the payday loans market which will create yet another mis-selling "scandal" on their watch. The FCA needs a radical overhaul.
Small sums
https://www.rewardrate.com/ No idea if it's live, but looks ready to go.
Jerry Loy bio: Jerry Loy has extensive experience in growing and developing financial service organisations. He advises the Department of International Trade on the design, implementation and management of a wealth management programme to increase foreign direct investment to the UK and chairs/vice chairs audit committees for two educational establishments in Surrey. He is also vice chair for the Foyer Federation, a national youth homelessness charity. Previously, Jerry was the Chief Operating Officer at QNB Banque Privée and the Head of Operations and Administration at NBAD Private Bank. Jerry is a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales.
I sent an email to ASAG last week asking if they had any news about when lending may restart or had news of any other positive developments within Amigo. No response to date. I think that they've gone into hibernation in anticipation of a long winter of discontent amongst AMGO shareholders.
Hotmessexpress. Have a look at the Investopedia araticle about rights issues. https://www.investopedia.com/investing/understanding-rights-issues/
I'm looking forward to arranging my no interest loan, but it would be helpful to know whom I claim against when I default. That's the way these small loan operations work, isn't it? Perhaps the FCA will close them down as the borrowers are clearly at the bottom of the creditworthiness ladder and won't be able to service the debts forced upon them by unscrupulous credit unions........
TNP: ferrous, but rather rusted right now! :-)
Suffer; you understood my point, thank you for posting your explanation below. I own over 2 million shares, and don't want to end up owning 40 million after an unecessarily large rights issue, but would do so if needs must. It could turn out to be the sale of the century or a black hole :-)
Having read the posts below I appreciate that ASAG is controversial, but they are shareholders and are part owners of the Company. The Judge must consider all the facts put before him, so having Counsel present the shareholders' case, especially when it varies from the Amigo Board's position, seems entirely reasonable. Given that Amigo is bearing the legal costs of the claimants', should Amigo not bear the cost of the legal representation of shareholders - whether ASAG members or not? It is our capital that has kept the show on the road.
FCA protecting the vulnerable by preventing Amigo from lending? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/21/one-million-debt-loan-sharks-demanding-sexual-favours-repayment/
Trades today have been net purchases according to several websites.
Absolutely right MikeSM, "As far as Amigo following FCA regulations is concerned, the issue was one of the company following the regulations but falling foul of new regulations when applied retrospectively. An impossible situation for any company to deal with." The crux of the Amigo (and some other lenders') saga. The FCA changed the rules. The FCA then changed their minds about appearing at SoA 1 Court hearing. The FCA are unfit for purpose, as has been shown by their other major gaffs.
Perhaps the FCA will realise that they have made a colossal mess of the secondary lending market and will not try to undermine Amigo's case at the next Court hearing?
I'm not hopeful as the problem with incompetents is that they don't realise that they are incompetent.