Eg Solutions Share Discussion Threads

[gerry2] 22/7/2005 14:58

Bill
Its More likely you will get a Tv reminder through the post .
You Can Put another £26.50 and you could buy a £126.50 TV licence.
Thats assuming you get 10% of Nothing ?
But as My ol man used to say 10% of nothing is like 100% of F-ALL .
LOL

[sportbilly1976] 22/7/2005 13:50

I bought £1000 worth of Energis on the day they were suspended - wise move !!

Are they worth anything currentlty - I have just read that C&W are to approach shareholders regarding a takeover - should i expect something through the post then??

£100 of something is bette than £1000 of nothing, as my ol' man would say.

[htrocka] 22/7/2005 12:32

with ref to above

`Lapthorne said...we are approaching stakeholders in Energis....`

Being an Energis shareholder,I remember when I first got the reconstruction report from the Auditors...I was reffered to..as a `stakeholder`


However a glimmer of hope from todays Telegraph.


Lapthorne said that, as yet, this is `no done deal`...and not certain to go through.....we are approaching the stakeholders of Energis with a possible aquisition`....

This sound ominus in director speak...sounds as if he`s worried about the minority bondholders...Adrian could have apoint here?

[htrocka] 22/7/2005 12:27

looks like the end of the road...

[beau62] 22/7/2005 10:56

LMAO

Be careful, he has friends in high places and any suggestion of payment for his services will result in the post being pulled.

Still LMAO.....and, oh, all just my opinion of course.

HT - I agree, level playing field and all that. Can't see the system changing in the forseable future anyway.

Beau

[mooreatupton] 22/7/2005 10:45

It seems that someone thinks it is still worth employing Jak to keep the dissenting rabble in check!

[htrocka] 22/7/2005 10:43

P.S...There`s nothing wrong with Barclays...their a good bank, my bank in fact. One has to give them credit for good business accumen, I`d probably do the same...The problem does not lay with the banks...the problem is with the `system`.

[beau62] 22/7/2005 10:36

Gosh htrocka

All that remains now is to wait for Jakko's retort. It normally comes within seconds of any post that dares to suggest anything other than the banks are holier than thou.

One has to admit he's done a grand job in repelling any negative sentiment or opinion. All, of course, free of charge. The wonders of human spirit and neighbourly deeds all selfishly delivered despite the hour of the day. That can only be applauded...........

Beau

[clarence beeks] 22/7/2005 10:24

I'm moving my pension to Barclays!*




*This should not be taken as investment advice

[htrocka] 22/7/2005 10:22

ref JaKnife.... ref Barclays...so what.


Being both creditor and shareholder gives one one an overiding and unfair advantage as opposed to being just on of these entities. For obvious reasons knowledge privvy to creditors may not reach the public domain in fact deliberately be withheld from shareholders.....but being both creditor and shareholder now gives Barclays an unfair advantage with respect to equity strategy that the shareholder only does not posses. Being both credit/equity holder...one can `go long` or `short` in confidence with the information obtained at the creditors meetings...I`ve no doubt that Barclays `shorted` this stock during the `restructuring` talks...as you say ...`so what`. At this momet in time, this situation is unregulated...therefore quite legal ...even G8 compalined of the scenario. If a shareholder only, used company information to his advantage this would be classified as insider trading and if caught would probably go to prison...but if you`re both shareholder and creditor...it`s `ok` and you have the `square mile`s` backing......this system has `evolved`...with the FSA`s blessing.

Barclays made money when the share price was going up, Barclays made money when the share price was going down....and they`ve even got their `loan` back....hindsight indicates that one of the reasons for the`loan` as creditor...was to buy them access to inside company information that was used to exploit share trading activities by the bank it`self.This was not just a win/win situation...but a win/win/win/win situation.

[plantronics] 22/7/2005 01:06

I meant to say that in my PEP i still have a few EGS from days gone by. still showing at 0 current value. Would any value come to these?

[gerry2] 21/7/2005 23:51

LOL

?

[plantronics] 21/7/2005 23:42

WIll former EGS shareholders see any benefit?

[gerry2] 21/7/2005 23:41

more efficient?
LOL

The stupidity of the Many is outweighed by the contempt of the few.

Until they wake UP ?

[gerry2] 21/7/2005 23:15

JakNife
Re-So what?
A substantial involvement in Loaning other peoples Money ?
Is a more apt description .
At NO Risk Whatsoever to Them !
I have nothing but utter contempt for Banks .

[htrocka] 21/7/2005 20:34

I note the article mentions Barclays....it was also known that during the last few days of trading. Barclay the creditor was also Barclay the equity holder...

[htrocka] 21/7/2005 20:26

thought this would be interesting...

[htrocka] 21/7/2005 09:24

thanks Adrian.

[adrian turner] 20/7/2005 19:10

htrocka,

Chelys is a private company, but it has a complicated capital structure with a hierarchy of interests in which former Energis shareholders, of course, come last.

I presume the banks could force this through, but we can expect the (lower ranking) bondholders to put up stiff resistance. Even if they have no case in law, there are other levers that they may be able to pull. It could get interesting!

ADRIAN TURNER

[gerry2] 18/7/2005 17:03

AT Indeed :-

"The tie-up could see Mr Norman and John Pluthero, chief executive of Energis, benefiting from large payouts. If C&W agrees to pay £710 million for Energis, Mr Norman could receive about £2 million for his ordinary A shares and Mr Pluthero around £2.5 million The pair were handed shares to revive the business, which succumbed to insolvency when telecoms spending dried up after the dot-com crash."






Did Our Dot com crash ?
Was there any witnesses ?