Member Info for usernames

Cardinal59 - I'd ordinarily agree but it wasn't Counsel's idea to put the sword of damocles before creditors. Amigo management took that decision, all by themselves. I suspect that Counsel might suggest the old saying about being unable to polish a certain something might have applied.

Anyway, what's done is done. But let's not big up the Amigo management team until after they've delivered something worth celebrating.

C'mon, let's be honest. It was a strategic FkUp of epic proportions by a management team that should have known better.

I'm hoping that we have some credibility left with the FCA and can turn this back around. GLA.

Jennison ^

Magpies1862 - you have more faith in Mr Jennings than I do. Wasn't he at the healm with SOA v1...? Didn't strike me as a man who knew what he was doing.

priv - surely his mum wouldn't want to ruin his sexlife by denying his online access ;)

Prolee - are you upset that the SP hasn't collapsed...?

fundamentals - you make it sound like the government know what they are doing.

How many u-turns will it take to convince you that they are a little bit lost...? :)

Ha ha. These people do this for a living...?!

Their folks must be so proud. A wasted education, if any. GCSEs, A-Levels, undergraduate and then a masters to get that job with a hedge fund. Probably haven't told mummy and daddy that they spend their days on here spouting drivel.

Personally, I don't think that anyone could be paid to make a contribution on here but you never know. Where would you sign up for this pi55 easy BS job? I'll do it ;)

Google "amigo financial calendar" and click the link for investor relations.

Well put Franky.

Blueskyboy - they already had a crack at that and messed it right up! Hence why were down to 8.5 pps.

Let's all just hope the BOD earned a lot from the first half of the year and will approach this the second time around a bit more impressively.

Thanks HH, that made me chuckle.

Yuri - the investment oversight committees, risk management and compliance departments would not allow portfolio managers to invest client money in a high risk company like Amigo atm, even if the manager had a view on how this would play out. It's less to do with "more information" and more to do with processes and procedures in regulated firms. Look at what happened recently at Credit Suisse with Gteensill for a good example of why you don't override risk managers.

We were thinking along the same lines :)

The only thing the low SP does now is that it makes a nonsense out of the RI argument. That doesn't mean it won't somehow get worked in.

Once information comes to the market, the SP will react. I don't think the BOD are trying to keep the SP down. They just don't know where they're going yet so they don't have anything to tell the market IMHO.

Gruntie - Am I missing something here? Surely once SOAv2 is announced, the SP will react. If creditors vote in favour of SOAv2 the SP will react again. Then we're back to where we were the last time around facing a court hearing with an uplift on the current SP. The stick will be there again.

"The new board are far from stupid..."? I'm sorry, but did you not follow the second court hearing in any detail? We had our arses handed to us on a plate and then the share price went off a cliff! That's the BOD's bag to carry.

I don't want to get into name calling because I don't personally know any of the BOD members. However, I would reserve the "far from stupid" accolade to those that get it right first time around. It is a tough job but you don't try and BS your way past creditors, regulators and the Court in the hope of getting a result IMHO. That's more Del Boy than anything else and let's face it, this ain't Trotters Independent Traders.

There were a number of factors the Judge took into consideration. My point is that Amigo have highlighted the least damaging aspect and ignored all the others.

This seems to be compounding the very point they have highlighted as the issue with the SOA being rejected. A lack of information for creditors, or worst still, misleading information.

*to not

FFS! When are Gary and his merry band of PR/marketing people going to wake up and smell the coffee.

"...the Judge decided to to approve the Scheme as he did not think we had provided sufficient information to creditors to decide how to vote."

Really, was that everything Gary? No mention of the FCAs objection, there being room for a better deal or that Amigo weren't actually facing immanent administration?

The sooner they start playing this straight with creditors, the sooner this will be sanctioned by the Court. Reign in those PR/marketing muppets and leave this in the hands of the lawyers.

Jesus wept...

And Senator1 to help explain the financial landscape facing Amigo...? :)

There are a lot of attention seeking prats on this BB. Best just to ignore them IMHO, rather than attempting to engage with them on any level.

Life's too short.