Boohoo Share Discussion Threads

[hotaimstocks] 21/10/2021 15:59

RED FLAG EMERGENCY SELL/SHORT IT... founders let us down .125p
institutional investors and funds were told of this 100m lawsuit before investing ? hmmmm looking like the answer begins with a N

[upthyboo] 21/10/2021 15:58

Auto sell triggered 😆 😆

[dissentingvoices] 21/10/2021 15:57

NEVER overlook the fact that the Kamani family have extracted hundreds of millions of pounds of SHAREHOLDERS MONEY out of Boohoo PLC.

Paying way over the odds to acquire the trading name and the branding of PrettyLittleThing, (previously owned by Kamani's own two sons).

Maybe compare the prices paid for PLT against the prices paid for Debenhams, Oasis, Coast, Karen Millen, etc and then draw your own conclusions.

Then Kamani installed his 3rd son to run BoohooMan and how many more Kamanis are actually on the Boohoo payroll...... check for yourselves !!!

It is no wonder former Boohoo Chairman, Peter Williams was on Kamani's back about "feathering the nest" and non compliance with the City's rules

[upthyboo] 21/10/2021 15:56

May thy boo be thy shelter in troubled water's boo boo up up boo go on my boo bootifull

[transhoneyqueens] 21/10/2021 15:53

UKNEONBOY have you any news today on this 100m lawsuit .. boohoo may need funding soon

[transhoneyqueens] 21/10/2021 15:53

does more returns = more costs for boohoo ??? Ask yourself why don't the directors buy any shares like ASOS directors did ??? boohoo RED FLAGS ... 150p

[buy2sell1] 21/10/2021 15:47

Why is UKNEONBOY laughing ? Why is Melegramfottongo laughing ? Why is SHADOWFALL LLP laughing ? Why is MARSHALL WACE LLP laughing ? Why are SHORE CAPITAL (STOCKBROKERS) laughing ?

and not forgetting - why are AKO CAPITAL LLP laughing ?

[upthyboo] 21/10/2021 15:44

Fly my 👢 full boo ,up my boo boo, go on my boo 🚀
Technology shakedown auto sell triggered 😆 🤣

[buy2sell1] 21/10/2021 15:43

In the BLUE corner its the advfn number cruncher FACTSandFIGURES and in the RED corner representing the LOSERS its SLINKYJ.

My money is on the mighty F+F bean counter !!!

[slinkyj] 21/10/2021 15:42

Not losing you goon, I'm the money and getting better as the day goes on

[factsandfigures] 21/10/2021 15:40

putting you down is an absolute pleasure and so easy to do.

back in your box, loser

[slinkyj] 21/10/2021 15:37

Playground reply ha ha ha ha oh dear

[slinkyj] 21/10/2021 15:35

Gonna boom

[factsandfigures] 21/10/2021 15:35

make me !!! BRING IT ON,

you are not smart enough, you are not fast enough and you are not fit enough.

all you are is :

[slinkyj] 21/10/2021 15:32

Who cares, you don't your weirdo! Now bore off

[factsandfigures] 21/10/2021 15:31

what about the other MINUS 43% that investors have already lost on Boohoo during the last 12 months ???



slinkyJ - YOU POST YOUR FANTASY & LIES, BUT THIS CHART SPEAKS VOLUMES !!!

[slinkyj] 21/10/2021 15:26

7% + day tomorrow. Boo days

[jackson83] 21/10/2021 15:13

loading up on BOTB as expecting news soon wink wink

[factsandfigures] 21/10/2021 14:48

Injecting a quick dose of realism to ADVFN

You clowns that make up the Kamani Propoganda crew have cost small Private Investors thousands of pounds

but more importantly you've cost the large City Investors millions of pounds.

Congratulations

[slinkyj] 21/10/2021 14:35

I'm all good click, but you go for it.

[chickbait] 21/10/2021 14:32

Does anyone want to know how to upload silly pictures and gifs to these threads like the derampers?

[slinkyj] 21/10/2021 14:27

The defendants argue that despite claiming that they “fell victim to the deceptionâ€? of the retailers’ various sale events, they do not allege any tangible harm. Khan, for instance, claims that he was duped by Boohoo’s “50% Off Everythingâ€? advertising, but “does not allege that he is out-of-pocket anything, e.g., that his $6 t- shirts were worth less than the rock-bottom price he paid for them.â€? With that in mind, Boohoo and co. argue that the plaintiffs lack standing to bring their suits since “they do not plausibly allege that they suffered any damages, i.e., that the price they paid was more than the value received.â€? Beyond the plaintiffs’ failure to establish that they were harmed by the defendants’ “false advertising,â€? the defendants claim that the court should strike down the sweeping class allegations for products that Kahn, Hilton, and Lee never actually purchased. “For example, although she only bought one $24-pair of shoes on the Nasty Gal website, Lee seeks to serve as a class representative for claims covering every product sold on the Nasty Gal website to every customer in the U.S. over the past four years,â€? the defendants assert. The same for Hilton, who only “bought seven items,â€? and Khan, who bought twelve items, seven of which were “the same $6 t-shirt.â€? As such, they “do not have standing to assert claims related to products they never purchased and online advertising they never saw or relied upon,â€? according to counsel for Boohoo, PrettyLittleThing and Nasty Gal. Still yet, the retailer defendants claim that the plaintiffs have filed to “satisfy [the] ‘heightened’ pleading standard that must ‘state with particularity the circumstances surrounding fraud.’â€? Citing an earlier decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California (Rael v. New York & Company), which refused to side with a plaintiff that alleged price fraud on the basis that it is not enough to merely allege that a product was sold was “not sold at the [original, pre-sale] price in the three months before [the plaintiff’s] purchase,â€? the defendants argue that the “same theory â€" and the same allegations â€" [are] advanced by the plaintiffs hereâ€? and should similarly be dismissed by the court. With the foregoing in mind, and given that plaintiffs alleged failure to adequately plead their unjust enrichment claim (“When a plaintiff fails ‘to sufficiently plead an actionable misrepresentation or omission, his [or her] restitution claim must be dismissed.’â€?), the defendants ask the court to grant their motion to dismiss and strike