Leisure & Gaming Share Discussion Threads

[ldmachin] 27/9/2010 20:52

jmaccer,

Fully listed back at 1p a share? I don't think so, the nominal shareprice is 5p a share, so shares would have to undergo a restructuring (as LNG have done before) to get the nominal shareprice value below the actually shareprice value...

... and you can bet shareholders will get shafted on that restructuring too.

[bleepy] 27/9/2010 20:50

nickymain

Are there grounds for FSA/police investigation,its enough to be led up the garden path.

Lets have this creative accounting examined independently before more is ripped up.

[nickymaine] 27/9/2010 20:47

it's true as far as we are aware. Just given away. This is closing for me now. Bath and bed. Thank you all for the exchange of views. Tomorrow will be an interesting day. Vote No.

[jmaccer] 27/9/2010 20:46

indeed all rescue plans need to be heard and considered, but where are these so called plans? they have been promised but not delivered either. surely gc then wants the company to go into administration so he can take it at half the current offer. the current offer allows for about 1p per share - the shares will go back on the market so you can trade at a discount or you can wait to see if the earn outs are achived - that is fact. you may have an opinion on what they will trade at but the fact remains there is a way out with cash, they are not worth 0. it doesn't affect me either way, but don't be lead astray by anyone on either side of the disucssion. asses your own personal circumstances and feelings. a good point about the finances though - who and where is the FD in all of this? i don't recollect anything from them - anyone know?

[burgerbarwomen] 27/9/2010 20:42

nickymaine - 27 Sep'10 - 20:29 - 2989 of 2992

-----------------------------------------------------------


well if what you say regarding Acropolis casino is true (and I don't know it is) then you should contact the Serious Fraud Office immediately.... simply sickening

[bleepy] 27/9/2010 20:31

nickymaine

Thnx,let the facts speak for themselves,those responsible must be removed and dealt with as time permits.

Their reasons and motives can never justify what's happened,that not being enough they put crumbs on the table,despicable,no conscience even.

[burgerbarwomen] 27/9/2010 20:31

jmaccer


THERE IS NOTHING OF OFFER... WHAT PART OF THAT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND???


If I were a shareholder my stance would be vote yes and receive nothing... vote no and maybe the Fools have a plan

any meaningful rescue plan MUST be considered by the directors.. if they don't then that is fraud.

[jmaccer] 27/9/2010 20:27

personally i am not here to lay the blame or say what could or should have been done, i am merely laying the facts down as i see them for the current situation. if things had been done differently in the past then perhaps the group wouldn't be in this situation. but that doesn't help anyone now facing the current dilemma does it. so still the issue remains do you take what's on offer or do you leave it to the administrators. or do you wait for these major shareholders to come up with something or are they just as bad leading everyone a merry dance about other offers they are putting together when in reality there just isn't anything. i guess tomorrow wall give all to reveal their true colors and for any questions to be asked. and given the odds available (1000's were quoted - £10 on the nose for me) i will have a wager that both rc and gc are there tomorrow to answer all.

[burgerbarwomen] 27/9/2010 20:15

and who do we hold responsible for the AAMS fine?

a director is supposed to check the terms/conditions of the license BEFORE seeking a buyer.... it's called 'doing what your blo*dy well paid to do'

a complete disgrace in all aspects

so Mr jmaccer... why didn't the directors seek an emergency rights issue at 1p to raise 2m?

that would have been fair to ALL shareholders..... so say 300m shares in issue at 1p, 6 months good trading and 3p or 9m cap could have been achieved....

debt free company with new software, new management ect:

well?

[jmaccer] 27/9/2010 20:12

the problem is burger as you well know that with all this litigation and aams penalties and so forth it is very difficult to find a willing buyer or partner for the group. you will note sportingbet has just paid out 33m to the US which doesn't help.

[burgerbarwomen] 27/9/2010 20:10

ldm

quote me for free... conditional on you handing me a personally autographed first copy

nickymaine

i doubt I'm able to add anything useful other than my sincerest sympathies.... I'd love to see the Fools come out with substantially more, as I'm sick of these AIM stings...

[nickymaine] 27/9/2010 20:08

burgerbarwoman, if you feel like a chat in next half hour, email me .. [e-mail]. I guess that goes for the rest of you too, seeing as I can't find a way of making private contact.

[ldmachin] 27/9/2010 20:04

Bloody hell, I swear when this all said and done i'm going to publish these BB thread postings in a little book* who's title is yet to be determined (i'm open to suggestions).

It's been quite a tale. But unfortunately, i think it'll be one of those nasty rare tales where the villain wins and our protagonists end up with a proper shafting. It's a shame i can't market the book as a 'who done it', because it's been obvious from day one (to me anyway) and no doubt to anyone who reads the first chapter 'who did it'.

Maybe i should arrange an interview with Creedy now so i can get his side of the story down... i'll see if he's about at wimbledon hockey club this weekend for a quiet natter

* I hereby claim copyright to all postings seeing as i created the thread.

[nickymaine] 27/9/2010 19:19

thank you burgerbarwoman. Sense, as usual.

[nickymaine] 27/9/2010 19:17

good on you Bleepy ... I've liked your posts.

[nickymaine] 27/9/2010 19:17

hey jdmaccer, I really do hear your comments about nose and face (trust me, I'm going to look bloody stupid without my nose), but there are new bites out there, solicited by shareholders, not the directors. They may come to nothing, I know that. All this action should have happened a long time ago, months ago, and we have been led a merry dance. I wouldn't be posting here if I didn't think a 'no' vote was right, and it'll leave us with nothing if it fails, which it might. But do give consideration to the fact that while LNG initially put Betshop out on the market with hopes of, say 10p, and was knocked back on due diligence, then perhaps similar companies might be attracted at, say 5p? And only as they should.

[burgerbarwomen] 27/9/2010 19:13

jmaccer

you know perfectly well that a yes vote would result in shareholders ending up with nothing... a cash shell with about 700k sterling and significant ongoing costs/possible litigation issues is good for only one thing and that's paying the wages of certain directors

if the current BOD had an ounce of decency, then the offer would be 0.5p in cash, with the remainder held back for minimal ongoing expenses

are you feeling a little nervous tonight jmaccer?? i wonder why??

i smell a Fool fightback if you don't like it.... well you know where to go pal

[jmaccer] 27/9/2010 19:06

hello, a friendly response for once! indeed there have been bites, but they have come and gone for one reason or another, if one is presented tomorrow at the meeting then by all means listen to it, but if nothing is there then take it that there isn't one around the corner. the current position of lng has been well publicized for 4 months now so i am sure all bites have come in by now, otherwise they are waiting to speak to the administrator and take it up for a song leaving shareholders with nothing which is something i would not like to see given the hard times everyone is in these days. i personally don't have a shareholding and i have stated this before so of course it is not unacceptable to ask. i though have been through this situation myself and lost a lot from it and my recommendation to anyone in a similar position is to take what you see on offer, don't cut you nose to spite you face, there's always the next investment. good luck in whatever you decide to do and let's hope the major shareholders have something up their sleeve, i fear though there is too much for even Paul Daniels. it would be interesting to understand what the current vote counts stands at at present.

[oneillshaun] 27/9/2010 19:03

nickymaine - jmaccer does not hold but he does speak facts.

[bleepy] 27/9/2010 18:54

nickymaine

Good post,i to hope we will see some justice done tomorrow.

BTW..my vote is a resounding NO.

[nickymaine] 27/9/2010 18:49

jmaccer, hello.

The company is indeed in a sorry state, and debts and fines, and 'amounts owed', have accrued, under questioning, at a frightening speed. The initial estimate for a shareholder rescue was £1.2m ('ish). Well, reality puts that in fairyland. However, a company large enough to shrug off those hits that are coming to the company, and capitalise on what is there, still has a valid business proposition. Yes, I hear 'bust' and no, the shareholders are not going to put good money after bad. But I know for a fact that there are 'bites' out there, with, I hope, some full disclosure, which are capable of a move to fruition. jmaccer ... what's your shareholding? Is that an unacceptable question on ADVFN?