We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Worldspd | LSE:WSPR | London | Ordinary Share | IE00B2357Y89 | ORD EUR0.015 |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 37.00 | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 37.00 | GBX |
Worldspd (WSPR) Share Charts1 Year Worldspd Chart |
|
1 Month Worldspd Chart |
Intraday Worldspd Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30/10/2013 | 10:35 | WorldSpreads group plc | 641 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 03/2/2013 18:50 by spob good to know that for accounts up to the limit of 50k that you at least get all of your funds if the firm goes bustsorry to those who had over this limit with WSPR this situation creates logistical problems when funds grow well beyond the 50k limit. 500k = 10 accounts to manage :( |
Posted at 03/2/2013 09:51 by spob Regarding Worldspreads clients who held less than £50K here.I am interested to know how the valuation process was conducted for their accounts with WSPR. How were open positions on their accounts valued ? Was a specific date given such as the administration date or share suspension date ? Did clients with a total account value including open positions under £50K eventually receive their previous total account value in full ? Were any fees deducted from their compensation settlement cheque ? |
Posted at 03/7/2012 17:51 by mattjos Filled it all in today & attached copies of Statements from WSPR & screen prints i took on 19/3/12 of the account as supporting evidence.Scanned it in as a pdf file and sent it off .. took about 10 mins. Seemed simple enough to me |
Posted at 02/5/2012 09:52 by old giggleswickian It is interesting that there seems to be a focus here on the actions of the auditor, possibly on account of their national prominence but little is being said about:-"Several clients allege that much of the missing money was lost through an illegal scheme to support the company's share price. The people say that managers of the company encouraged wealthy clients to take leveraged long positions in Worldspreads stock, promising to indemnify them against any losses. The company then bought the corresponding shares in the market, allegedly using other client funds to make up the difference between the wealthy clients' bets and the cost of the shares. Worldspreads did not force the clients to make good on their losses when the share price fell but KPMG, the special administrator, may pursue these clients for the outstanding amounts." The last time I remember this sort of thing going on a couple of people went to prison but the really good news was that one of them became the first (and only) person to recover from Alzheimers. History tells us that accountants are rarely blamed for the actions of dubious company executives but if I was one of these wealthy clients I would be reading books on how to survive in prison, assuming that I hadn't been to Public School. Ian. The thought of steveglobal4 being involved in a share support scheme is priceless but unlike him I shall refrain from suggesting this is the case without a scintilla of evidence. |
Posted at 01/5/2012 17:49 by simon cawkwell Gentlemen,I think one or two people ought to calm down over actions putative against E and Y. It would be necessary for the claim to show that E and Y were negligent. The mere fact that money went missing when they were in a position possibly to note such a development is not proof of liability or anything like it. Remember: the auditor is NOT a bloodhound. He is just a chap who, using limited and expensive time, must look sensibly at what is going on and follow up palpable concerns. There is absolutely no evidence yet publicly to hand that failure in this regard obtained at WSPR. Simon Cawkwell |
Posted at 27/3/2012 11:21 by joe moon High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.cAsked in 2008 for his favourite piece of business advice, Conor Foley, chief executive of the spreadbetting group Worldspreads, replied: "Look after the downside and the upside will look after itself." Four years later, the failure of Mr Foley's company to "look after the downside" has left it in the hands of administrators from KPMG, who are faced with a £13m gap between the company's cash balance and the amount that it owes clients. The company's demise happened quickly. Mr Foley and Niall O'Kelly, financial director, resigned abruptly on March 14. Two days later Worldspreads suspended its shares, citing "financial irregularities". Last Monday the company announced its insolvency, warning that it had only £16.6m with which to repay customer accounts of £29.7m. While Mr Foley denies any knowledge of the irregularities, industry observers say that his aggressive growth drive had raised eyebrows long before last week's closure of the company. Worldspreads, which floated on Aim in 2007, was a company intent on global expansion. In July 2008 Mr Foley, founder and chairman of the Irish International Business Network, said "there are 100-plus countries where we believe we could expand this [company] to" days after announcing annual revenue of just 12.3m. Its hunger for growth prompted Worldspreads to sell its Irish division, the original core of the company, to management in 2009 for 11.1m just 2.6 times the division's pre-tax earnings for the previous full year. The Irish business's pre-tax profit of 4.3m accounted for nearly all the group total of 4.6m in the year to March 2009, but Worldspreads said it doubted that the group could stay so profitable given worsening economic conditions in Ireland. The company pumped much of the sale proceeds into expanding in southern Europe, while also fighting for a bigger share of the UK spread betting market. Its marketing expenditure increased from 580,000 to 3.2m between the 2010 and 2011 financial years, wiping out profits yet failing to produce the higher predicted revenues. The constant disposal of "non-core" divisions enabled Worldspreads to boast of double-digit increases in revenue from the remaining parts of the business. But this masked declining profitability. In its latest interim results, published last November, Worldspreads reported revenues of 8.3m from continuing operations and an operating loss of 596,000. Worldspreads was also struggling to keep up with the technological innovation of bigger rivals such as IG Group and CMC Markets. "We didn't see them as much of a threat their platform was pretty slow and clunky," says the chief executive of one competitor. For the last 18 months, Worldspreads had offered "zero spreads" for some of the most popular bets. This innovation reflected the company's excessive risk appetite, says Justin Bates, an analyst at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. Spreadbetting companies typically hedge large exposures to their customers' bets by taking offsetting positions in the market, while making money from the "spread" between the prices paid by customers to buy and sell a position. However, in the absence of a spread, Worldspreads could make money from its clients only by taking the other side of their bets effectively adopting the traditional bookmaker's model. In an extended market rally such as the one early this year a spreadbetting company with large unhedged exposure to its clients' long positions is likely to face substantial losses. This may have been the final blow that forced Worldspreads to declare insolvency, Mr Bates says. KPMG's administrators expect it will be several weeks before they can say how the £13m shortfall in Worldspreads developed. But people close to the situation suspect that the company may have dipped into supposedly segregated client accounts over a period of years, allowing it to disguise the extent of its losses. Unlike listed peers IG and London Capital Group, Worldspreads never gave details of the funds it held on clients' behalf in its annual results statements. Others in the industry worry that Worldspreads' collapse coming only six months after the bankruptcy of MF Global, another spread betting provider could damage the reputation of the sector as a whole. Operators have rushed to distance themselves from the controversy, stressing their own high standards of compliance. "It's a disappointment when another company lets the industry down," says Tim Howkins, chief executive of IG. Meanwhile, many of the company's 5,000 clients are asking how regulators and Ernst & Young, Worldspreads' auditor, failed to spot the irregularities earlier. Twenty clients with between £100,000 and £3m trapped in the company say they are considering legal action against E&Y and Worldspreads' directors, who include Charlie McCreevy, a former Irish finance minister. "A lot of depositors will be very scared now," says Nirav Shah, one of the high-value clients. "Regulation needs to be made tighter so this doesn't happen again." Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2012. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web. |
Posted at 19/3/2012 15:52 by taximania lift and shift , they closed everything out at the max spread price ie the one that would have been showing on your account at the close on friday ...they didnt do it by market price just at the top and bottom of the price range depending on whether you were short or long ...more money down the drain :-)edit : check your last contract note ...the closing prices of positions were the same |
Posted at 19/3/2012 09:23 by scrutable WSPR was run well on a day to day basis. A clear and efficient trading platform, good service levels, good customer relations, decent and helpful, rather than rapacious staff. That is why I wound up my positions with each of the other SB cos over the years and traded exclusively with WSPR.Till now there is no evidence to suggest that the trading strength at WSPR was being impaired by further trading - only the hint that the damage was done by fraud and diversion of funds to private pockets and/or some large unhedged positions going the wrong way. So why did it have to be wound up? The company could surely have been left to continue trading as a going concern by the administrators, provided that all future trades were immediately hedged. The administrators' actions to cease trading were not obligatory. Many insolvent companies continue trading where there is positive cash flow. KPMG were precipitate and have maximised the losses to all and sundry. Surely they owed a duty of care of care to all asset holders? The shareholders and staff are big losers, after the few in number but large investors who do not rank for FSA protection - but the business model had previously always made a modest profit, and was probably profitable on a rolling basis. |
Posted at 18/3/2012 09:53 by baldeagle5 The elephant in the room is if forced liquidations of positions occur. If you have put up margin, in good faith, and through fraudulent actions of Wordspreads Directors/employees you are forced to sell these in closure - at a price that is disadvantageous - then that is the real action (aside from any haircut on deposited funds obviously) such clients who suffer will have.Let's say your long GKP and you have just enough margin to hold the position but a forced liquidation occurs on Monday. 2 questions - how do they get out of say 5/6m shares and what price are they booked at? They will have to give it as a block order to the market makers who will have your throat out. They cannot give one client one price and another one a different price if you see what I mean? If anybody does suffer like this you will be better served to act as a group with one law firm as opposed to individually. Not least from a costs perspective. |
Posted at 17/3/2012 20:16 by super ego Free market capitalism is a dangerous (risky) game. When you have serious amounts of capital it is essential that your supplier is highly capitalised. Look at the people who put their life savings into the Icelandic banks for a few extra basis points, they deserved to get skinned for such poor decsision making, sadly the State bailed them out.The only spread betting company I use is IG because they appear to be well capitalised and I can monitor their share price, if I have too much cash on deposit I will transfer it to my bank and vice versa. You'd think that traders would have become more aware of counterparty risk after the banking crash and MF Global. |
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
