We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| London Cap | LCG | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 0.80 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.80 | 0.80 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 28/9/2018 11:53 by dusseldorf Indeed, it's meaningless though unfortunately since Charles Henri-Sabet stole the company months ago. Although it was done within the law it was essentially theft on a grand scale. LCG's turnaround was inevitable, but Sabet who is adept at running close to the legal line is quite happy to cross the moral one when it comes to his own pockets. It's basically financial fraud but using certain merits of the law and deep pockets. The point at which he made his 'offer' - he had 3 months worth of trading data from the current H1, he knew the turnaround was occuring essentially his offer was significantly below what would be considered fair value based on results he knew were coming. Not a single reference to the future of the investment vehicle that original investors are left with, which is the main disappointment. I'm resigned to the fact that Sabet (as majority owner) will let it run into the ground/dilute it/liquidate it for no cost completing his legal theft, but I'm open to surprises. |
Posted at 29/12/2017 00:15 by kenny London Capital – a lesson in greed & the failure of the AIM listing systemBy Mr Karma | Thursday 28 December 2017 Friday’s news that London Capital (LCG)) was to move from AIM to the tertiary market that is NEX (and aptly described by Tom as the “lobster pot” although I’d call it “Hotel California market” in that you can “check in but you can’t check out”) was not greeted well by the market. In fact, the stock slumped by near half on the news (although it has to be said this was on nominal actual trading volume). At the closing price on Xmas eve (what a day to put out this news eh?) the market was just over £3 million. Set against net cash and ST receivables of just under £8 million at the end Jun stage and being conservative and adjusting this for say another £1 million of losses has the shares trading at less than half the net cash amount. Why you may ask is such a valuation which, by any conventional measure is cheap, are the shares trading at such a woeful level? The answer is pretty simple and is evident by much City commentary on the management and on-line at the site “GlassdoorR We start back in 2014 and the move by then CEO Kevin Ashby to take the proposed convertible loan note offer of £17.5 million rather than pursue the (albeit indicative) offers from Spreadex and ETX Capital and that were worth, we understand, around 30p per share. Yes that is right almost 30 times the current stock price. These loan notes came with the first death sentence for the minorities in that they were contingent upon said Mr Sabet becoming a CF1 Director. In a bit of poetic justice for Mr Ashby, shortly after Sabet installed himself under his gilded desk (at shareholders expense) Mr Ashby walked the plank leaving just pliable NED’s in situ that allowed Sabet to run the company as a private fiefdom. However, once installed it became apparent that Mr Sabet was not upto the task and aside from a highly questionable deal per HERE in which a company wholly owned by Sabet received an upfront fee of £780,000 and quarterly payments of £300,000 that set off further alarm bells for shareholders he proceeded to move offices closer to his home in Knightsbridge at a material cost to shareholders including, we understand, the fitting of a private shower for him (quite why he could not get a shower at this home just minutes away is beyond me!). Not content with this highly compromising set of affairs (where were the NED’s?!) he proceeded to increase his compensation to an incredible £675,000 in the year ended 2016. All the while losses where mounting within the business. Given that the company lost just under £1 million at the EBITDA level in first half 2017 (God knows what his sycophants on the Board will have rubberstamped his take from the pot for this full year...) it is no doubt becoming extremely apparent where the underlying profitability is going... Not in minorities pockets but Sabets! The genius (evil) stroke on his and bedside partner in this fiasco GLIO’s part was the tearing up of the convertible loan note deal put in place in 2014 & that was so controversial at the time in that the original terms had the conversion price at 27p per share. As the shares slumped to sub 5p by mid June 2016 patently Sabet was not going to honour this conversion price and so a scheme was concocted where fresh equity capital would come in at the 5p level to repay the convertible loan under the ruse that the convertible capital was not acceptable Tier 1 reg cap (irony being that if they had converted into equity it would have been!). How convenient! The Net effect was that GLIO and Sabet consolidated their control on the company by holding between them just over 80% of the shares as the subscription offer was largely exclusively to GLIO (how loud are the alarms bells ringing now?!!). Control was complete given that they now hold in excess of the key 75%+ threshold allowing them to pass special resolutions. Icing on the cake? In getting out of the onerous conversion terms by moving the equity conversion “in” price from 27p to 5p, (in effect the repayment from one hand to the other by GLIO to itself but gaining control) this also incurred a 10% commission in stock! I ask again, where were AIM regulation in this and the NED’s? The record seen here is truly an example of how it is “caveat emptor” at this end of the stock market. We would argue there is more protection on the pink sheets in the US or at least investors know what they are getting into there! So, we wind up with the shares having slumped to a level where investors felt that it could not go any lower. However, we had not counted on the depths that Sabet and his Board would sink in their total disregard of minorities - the move to NEX. I have scratched my head just why he would do this as opposed to simply taking the company private. I believe that the much lighter regulatory environment will allow the partners to carry out no doubt another capital raising (probably at a slightly higher price than the current stock price to try and minimise a large minority take up) and thus dilute the minorities further. Only at this point will the company then most likely be taken private and a “squeeze out” invoked once they are over the 90% threshold. Take under complete and with gusto I may say! I have learnt lessons here, namely that when there is a major shareholder with a “reputation Mr Sabet – do the decent thing and pay your long suffering minorities a decent premium to the NAV in taking London Capital private and bring this sorry episode to and end before you do your reputation any more damage (not sure how much lower it can go!). |
Posted at 11/8/2017 17:08 by dusseldorf Total 146 shareholders in LCG (nominees will hold multiple individual holdings)Those holding 500k+ as per register 4th July 2017. Numbers have been rounded. Total in count 380,531,000 (Used to calc percentage) NAME................ Vidacos nominees............ Equiom Limited............. Hargreaves lansdown nominees...8600000.. Aurora Nominees............ Stan Warinka............. HSBC nominee............. The Bank of New York Nominees..4100000... BNY (OCS) nominees............ Barclayshare nominees..........28 Securities services nominees...2500000.. Lynchwood nominees............ HSDL Nominees............ Beafort Nominees............ TD Direct.............. Huntress nominees............ James Capel nominees...........1 Lawshare............ Investor nominees............ Cenkos nominees............ Principal nomiees............. Private holder Shevaun..........500 Cantor Fitzgerald.......... Nomura nominees............ Aurum Nominees............ Others.............. TOTAL............... |
Posted at 02/8/2017 12:17 by ddubzy Feel for those that have held through this fall, but for new investors surely there must be/could be some real good gains to be made here. Clearly company in a big marketing drive and market volatility will return! |
Posted at 12/7/2017 13:57 by aleman LCG thrives on volatility. I would say that it is picking up despite VIX indications. Other indicators suggest investors are getting more worried about volatility and are trying to hedge against in ways other than VIX.There have been allegations VIX is being rigged. |
Posted at 05/7/2017 00:17 by dusseldorf I think LCGs online presence is pretty good at present, I guess they are aiming for excellent, not just good. 1p? Sounds good to me, I can buy more at less than half the price(!). I don't rate the chances of it dropping much further though (a peak below 2 for a pop-up perhaps as traders still clearing). The 'fuss' is over and time for day traders to make way for investors.I took total 200k today @2.17 for a sunny day. The market still needs some more tangible signs of recovery - not sure a trading update will be forthcoming in next few weeks, but interims end Sept is plenty soon enough for me. |
Posted at 02/7/2017 19:09 by topvest Yes, some signs of recovery. Not sure I trust Mr Sabet though. Think the original deal that allowed the new investors (mostly him)to take a majority stake at 5p was unfair as he should have been investing at over 20p. Sabet is also sucking the company dry with £675k of salary and £1.2m through the Licence fee in note 32. That's a lot of cash being taken out of the business at this stage of its development. I've lost most of my money in this accident prone company. I'm going to hold on in the off chance something remarkable happens. Unlikely though. You can't make a good deal with a bad person to quote Warren Buffet. |
Posted at 29/6/2017 18:42 by jasonrogers Hi LuckyMouse,If FXCM were acting as a market maker on NDD forex execution we would not have suffered more than $200 million dollars in losses during the SNB flash crash. On NDD forex execution, every order is offset one-for-one with a liquidity provider. The trader has a position with FXCM and FXCM has an offsetting position with the liquidity provider. When the trader went into a debit balance, that meant FXCM also had a debit balance with the liquidity provider that had to be covered. So what you are implying is at odds with what actually happened. How does our NDD model work? Multiple liquidity providers compete to provide the best prices on FXCM's NDD execution model. Each liquidity provider streams through a direct feed of executable buy and sell prices to FXCM. FXCM's No Dealing Desk Price Engine selects the best buy price and the best sell price, which result in the best available spread. There is no markup added to FXCM's Standard No Dealing Desk account type, making our spreads transparent and some of the lowest in the industry. When you place an order, each order is offset one for one with a liquidity provider. This eliminates the conflict of interest between us and the trader. To the liquidity provider, all orders appear as Market Orders from FXCM and contain no information about the trader. Since your stops, limits, and your entry orders are invisible to these price providers, we create an environment free of price manipulation. When we combine this with no re-quote trading you have the opportunity to confidently trade all market conditions, even during key news events. How does our DD model work? For traders wanting to start with a smaller account balance, we offer traditional dealing desk model where FXCM acts as the counterparty and determines the prices and spreads. It's worth noting that FXCM uses the same base price for DD execution on Mini accounts (before adding a fixed markup) as the base price we use for our NDD execution (before adding the commission). That's a key reason you can have confidence trading with FXCM regardless of the account type you choose. A list of FXCM's liquidity providers and more information about NDD execution can be found here hxxps://www.fxcm.com Jason *Risk Warning: Our service includes products that are traded on margin and carry a risk of losses in excess of your deposited funds. The products may not be suitable for all investors. Please ensure that you fully understand the risks involved. |
Posted at 19/5/2017 09:19 by dusseldorf DrMaccers - thanks. Guess that confirms at any point prior to and including 30th June then.I'm keen to see progress, so the delay is a little frustrating, but reported FY16 will IMO still be loss making (but show strong gains in revenue, balance sheet) and FY17- into FY18 is when the turnaround should come to full fruition. Should be lots of pointers in results and perhaps a current trading update - e.g. is the marketing drive in 2017 bringing in more clients, how is overseas expansion timetabled - Stan Warwinka is a good call as he will be recognised in every country. I can't see them reducing overheads too much (if at all, they may even be up) in FY16 as redundancy costs, office move and ops to Cyprus will incur exceptional costs and savings only kick in mid Q4 FY16. Overseas staff in country to develop the market will also add to overheads in FY17. That said irratic market should be good for revenue capture and as each foreign market comes on stream, revenue should be boosted - I feel the brand is postioned well 'London Capital Group' 'lcg.com' 'Stan Warwrinka' 'listed on London Stock Exchange' are all ticks in the box in terms of providing reassurance to overseas investors that LCG is a reputable outfit. |
Posted at 16/5/2017 09:22 by dusseldorf Mister MD - I think it's simply a case of supply and demand. As the price was falling from 5-6p downwards (post mega dilution and poor results) the market would not take any volume. It probably meant that at the time any remaining insti from older days would be a forced to retain their holding whether they wanted to or not.Now the market for shares is more buoyant I suspect some holders who've wanted out for some time are offloading. The suspects are: % of Total GLIO Holdings Limited............. Charles-Henri Sabet*.............. London Capital Group Holdings Employee Benefit Trust........1.92% (not selling) Pictet & Cie Geneva.............. Marlborough UK Micro Cap Growth Fund................ Andrey Pavlov.............. Legal & General UK Alpha Trust............... Mr Stanislas Wawrinka............ Mr Francis D S Chapman............. Peterhouse Corporate Finance Ltd................. 91.11% held by 10 investors. So even though 91% classed as 'tightly held', there is in fact: 2.9+3.2+5.1+5.34+6.2 All of the 29,000,000 held (listed above) do not have to declare a shift in holdings as below 3%. Factor in that many PI's have bought from 2.5p upwards and the price is 50% higher (and many lemming investors sell at loss when they get twitchy), and the volume churn is not really surprising. Don't forget that whilst we're not rocketing, we also haven't had any news yet and many PI's would have used extended settlement. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
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
