Member Info for yespsb

It is a vanity project, one of many - it has absolutely no place in any global retailers portfolio.

And if think I am wrong well I really don't care and if you think it's retailing best practice name me one other global retailer who has invested millions in such nonsense?

And that Blert is the reason you don't work in the advertising & media sector ;-)

Manc my thoughts exactly and if I was a betting man I would bet that Apollo's bid was less than £1.70 because Matt was all to keen to let us know Apollo valued Ingenuity at more than the share price back then but not keen on telling anything else about the Apollo bid which I found to very frustrating and somewhat disingenuous of him.

Good posts VH & Manc and thanks to LBN for the retailtimes link

For the first time in a while Matt has given us a LinkedIn post that's excellent and grounded.

You can strategise all day long but you won't actually learn anything valuable until you do it and this softly softly rather than a big bang approach is to be commended 👍

Somehow Snr became Sbr 🙃

Dear Mrs Moulding SBR (aka maxmattmax ), we know you love your son like only a mother could but he's your child not ours. And whilst you look upon your son's antics through rosey tinted glasses we don't.

Sure he has his good points, we all do but please believe me and lots of others shareholders when I say your darling son is a woeful CEO.

I know this sounds harsh but it's the truth, he is not capable of being an effective CEO and you should encourage him to stand down or sell up and enjoy his vast wealth away from the trials and tribulations of the stock market. He would be happier, you would be happier and so would all the long suffering shareholders. Go on, you know it makes sense, encourage Matt to move on 🙂

Well said 101 👍

FWIW I have been on here long enough to see through you two and your unbalanced "Matts always great nonsense".

There's no one who has been investing for a good number of years who would not agree that the share price would be much higher with a CEO whose track record was proven and whose focus was on delivering shareholder value rather than moaning about the LSE, the same LSE that he chose to list the business on and the very same LSE that he made absolute killing from listing on.

Hypocrite doesn't start to describe the dreadfully vain Matt Moulding

NCC is a decent business, its ex, Man Utd supporting CEO Rob Cotton was everything the egotistical MM isn't. He grew the business very quickly in a profitable business operating across a number of niche markets. After 17 of outstanding service he resigned when NCC failed to deliver their expected earnings.

Meanwhile MM continues to fail, continues to indulge himself in vanity projects and has not come close to doing the decent thing and resigning.

THG needs a leader with integrity, not some 51 year old child.

Bravo Kando :-)

Ste 2000, you seem happy to use the term "slander" when someone's writes something you are not keen on.

For the record (your record) slander is legal term for a person SAYING something that is proven in court to be false. Typically is used when someone has said something on TV, radio, podcast, YouTube, Twitter (X) etc.

It's written equivalent is libel. Attention to detail is important in legal matters ;-)

With the benefit of hindsight I should have not used the phrase "real" and instead used "serious".

Apollo's undisclosed (why) offer was clearly serious as seen in their phase 1 due diligence and the very detailed post bid RNS where they made it clear that they could return. Unless my memory is tricking me I don't recall the 170 offer having the same look and feel. Please feel to contact me if I am wrong

For the record I did not and have not accused the THG board of lying regarding the 170 offer. What I said was it benefitted all concerned to have the offer publicly rejected. What I am also curious about is why that offer and the Apollo offer became public knowledge yet according to Matt the other numerous offers he and the board receive don't ?

I think you might want to put new batteries in yours :-)

The share price does not lie, nearly every single time Matt speaks the share price falls and that's because he doesn't say want savvy investors want to hear, what he does says is either irritating or irrelevant

If it was that clear cut then rest assured someone would have done but they haven't and I would be astonished if Apollo's opening bid was more than £1.75 and before there's a chorus of the other bid was £1.70 and the numbers are better now I personally have doubts about just how real the £1.70 was as it benefitted all concerned to make and have the offer publicly rejected.

That's lazy and misleading journalism but that shouldn't surprise anyone as most newspaper articles are just that.

The empirical data says that most western diets already contain more protein than we need and as your body cannot store protein, the unused protein is broken down into fats and carbs which in part explains the rise in obesity and diabetes.

At some point in the future there will no doubt be a "protein backlash" but that day is probably some way off.

MMM I don't know where you have suddenly come to here from but I think I speak for the majority when I say your not welcome. You add nothing of any value to the discussions so please leave and don't come back.

Manc I am sure the majority of long term sensible THG shareholders are also starting to question why they are continuing to hold on. I know I am having serious second thoughts because having a CEO who has so much money in the bank that he doesn't care a jot about shareholders who are not part of "his gang" is fraught with danger.

The two most recent approaches also raise far more questions than they provide answers and other than a hostile bid I cannot see anything happening that will get the shares moving to a long term upward trend.

Whether you sell or stay I wish you the best

Irrespective of the merits of his post he should put that effort into communicating his and his passive boards plans to deliver shareholder value. Shareholder value they collectively failed deliver during every single reporting period since the IPO.

In summary unless you're Matt's mum it's impossible not to conclude that for all his plus points he is a pi** poor CEO