Member Info for viking818

That has been the case all the way through BUT, when you consider yin and yang, it could also go up at any time.

Sorry if this has been covered, i have been too busy to study this like i used too and have as most, lost a little interest. However, i do still hold most of my original stake. So, this delay with the FCA, is it possible from the Judges ruling that this is with / has been with the FCA and can then with their agreement to its proposals, go straight back to the judge without the need of a whole new case? I seem to remember the Judge saying something along the lines of go away, sort it out and come back to me. As this is a Judges decision ultimately, once FCA approval has been granted, could the judge not then look at the new proposals in private without the need of a full hearing ? If so, then the next we may hear is passed or not? Is this feasible ?

Mtel ... It was in reaction to another post. It was in no way critical of you ! As far as i am concerned, if someone doesn't know, ask ! That is what i try to do. Never be afraid to ask !

Who is the bigger fool, he who is too proud to ask a question, in case it is looked upon as stupid? Or he who does not know / is not sure, so he asks and is prepared to be ridiculed but hopes to learn? We all start somewhere, hopefully at a lower level than where we are now! Personally, i like to see people ask ( if i think they are genuine ), to me, that is part of what a board like this is for ! No?

IK ...... recon you're about spot on !

Why would you delay bad news if you need the share price to be kept low whilst you are trying to negotiate, with what appears to be a very difficult body? A body who is going to hammer you if the share price rises! No, i think the end of year figures may be better than what the market would have expected. I think the board had hoped above all hope to have some form of agreement with the FCA in writing before releasing the results tomorrow and had delayed making the decision to delay releasing those results right up until the last minute, to give as much chance as possible for that agreement to be reached. I think the last thing the board needs is a rise in the share price just as they are negotiating with the FCA, the FCA would love that and would surely dig their heals in. I am under no illusion, i think the FCA want this company to fail and will do all they can to make such happen. What the FCA cannot do, is do that illegally or they will end up getting sued off of the face of the earth. Let the board do their job, slaughter them if they duck it up, not before ! You know it isn't sunk yet, because if it was, there wouldn't be the deadbeats on here trying to talk it down so they can make a few quick quid !

Some info leaked out somewhere?

Mark .... " is a good look " or do you mean isn't a good look ?

Mark ............ I do not agree with it, that is why i never signed up to it. Personally, i do not think it will be helpful. I hope i am wrong and if i am i will state such on here. I think the BoD should be left to do what they are paid to do. They made a mistake last time. We have all made mistakes in the past. I feel they should be left to sort it out with the FCA and i do not feel antagonising the FCA will help. I accept the right of those who have signed up to the group and protest as they see fit BUT i fear it will play into the hands of the FCA. As i stated earlier, i hope i am wrong !

Timmy ............. ;-) .... Well done !

Timmy, are you feeling ok? Are you in hospital ?

Ghost .... You start your post of 15.42 " Thanks Yuri ", then go on to state figures which are designed to look like you have pulled them from what he says and a some super detective work by yourself.
So, based on that, can you please tell me where Yuri stated there would be a 95% dilution for shareholders ( he didn't ) ? Or please provide this board with the evidence that has brought you to that lightbulb conclusion moment that shareholders are about to have a 95% dilution!
I will await references that point to that figure with interest !

Cardinal .... Maybe they have hired her for Christmas then !!!! Director of present wrapping !! ;-)

Truth .... If 49% is extortionate, most of the high street banks had better withdraw their overdraft facilities asap that they charge 40% for ! Then you can start lobbying for the High street banks to be forced to lend to those with poor credit histories at the same rates as i and i presume you also get ! I do not wish to be rude but that statement is so far out of touch with a huge swathe of our population, to most of them, 49% is cheap and it also means they do not have someone built like a brick outhouse knocking their door for the repayments or else !

Stevie ... Any positive news in the form of an RNS to keep shareholders up to date is likely to stir interest and up the SP goes again. Better to keep the SP down now it is here whilst they are doing what they have to do. One less stick to be beaten with !

TheDug ... It does not appear the FCA want shareholders hit with low dividends, they want the shareholders hit NOW ! They seem to suddenly want everything now and like HH says, the very thing that would have made things more possible quickly ( the share price in the 20's ), they have slashed, not by their opposition BUT the way they did it ! Opposing what was on the table and then subsequent constructive dialogue with Amigo prior to the Court hearing to create an acceptable proposal and this could / would have been sorted by now. That, is IF the FCA have any intention of sorting it !

TheDug ... It does not appear the FCA want shareholders hit with low dividends, they want the shareholders hit NOW ! They seem to suddenly want everything now and like HH says, the very thing that would have made things more possible quickly ( the share price in the 20's ), they have slashed, not by their opposition BUT the way they did it ! Constructive dialogue with Amigo prior to the Court hearing and this could / would have been sorted by now. That, is IF the FCA have any intention of sorting it !

IK ... Agree 100 percent. Before i state the next bit, i am not bleating, my decision, no problem, i am a big boy and i will survive but i took a 68k hit when the FCA did their about turn ( there will be others who have taken far , far larger hits ) ! I think i have taken my hit already, a bigger hit than any of the mis-sold loanees i suspect ! Yet wee Jimmy wants me to take another hit ! I am with those who agree that the timeframe needs to be extended and the percentage upped . Sending Amigo to the wall does everybody over except the FCA, that, that is my concern !!!!!!!! I have no faith in the FCA any more, i sincerely hope they can restore it ! I am however not convinced they will not send Amigo to the wall just because they can and if they do, there will need to be an enquiry as to the handling of this debacle !

Jimmy, so you are now saying if the SOA was upped to say 25%, then you would expect shareholders to have to match that and only keep 25% of their shares putting 75% of their money into the pot?

HH .... I think that is a fair enough letter. I completely agree with your point about small investors losing due to the FCA changing their stance, i am one of them! I would not have held all of my shares going into the court case had i realised the FCA would be so vociferous in their opposition to the SOA.