LSE company dividends information has been updated. You can find this is in the menu on any Quote page. ADVFN team.


Manolete Partners Plc

0.00 (0.0%)
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Manolete Partners Plc LSE:MANO London Ordinary Share GB00BYWQCY12 ORD 0.4P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 219.00 21,935 08:00:19
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
214.00 224.00 219.00 207.00 219.00
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Legal Services 20.44 3.68 8.40 27.38 95.69
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
16:29:36 O 3 223.50 GBX

Manolete Partners (MANO) Latest News

Manolete Partners (MANO) Discussions and Chat

Manolete Partners Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
26/5/202310:30::: MANOLETE PARTNERS :::1,349
01/5/201914:14Manolete Partners at the UK Investor Show-

Add a New Thread

Manolete Partners (MANO) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type

Manolete Partners (MANO) Top Chat Posts

Top Posts
Posted at 26/5/2023 10:30 by rmjpb
Thanks for your reply Maddox. I've been in Mano now for around 3 years, with a considerable amount invested - based on the fundamental belief that life is tough in the U.K. and businesses are struggling and some will go to the wall - taking dodgy directors with them - who should be repaying the taxman. I had hoped that post covid and relaxing of bankruptcy restrictions, plus rapid rise in interest rates to slay zombie companies - would all feed through to Mano's share price by now. Surely the gloomier things get, the brighter it is for Mano.
Posted at 25/5/2023 18:40 by maddox

We're in a 'risk-off' investment climate and many funds have suffered significant fund redemptions - basically individual investors withdrawing their money. Funds have then had to sell shares to raise money to pay-out to investors and thus share prices fall. There are further concerns about inflation, interest rates and whether we're heading into recession.

Whilst MANO also has the attraction of being uncorrelated with the general economy, metrics supportive of the investment case, investors are reticent and sitting on their hands, so we're lacking buyers. At some point sentiment will change, contrarian investors will be followed in by momentum investors and the share price may well charge away. Impossible to say when this will happen but it always does.

The contrarian-side of my investment style usually takes me in early, you get the better prices but often then need patience; nearly always more patience than I anticipated. Or, you can wait for 'price confirmation' from Mr Market and have to compete for shares against other buyers at higher prices, which suits the momentum-style investor.

Posted at 25/5/2023 16:48 by maddox
Thanks for the link sallad. Great to see Steven Cooklin at Mello in Chiswick - a superb event and fantastic opportunity to talk to CEOs.

I've been paying close attention to the upturn in the leading indicator the Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidations (CVL) figures - these figures are the source for cases that will be referred to MANO for litigation financing. We've had to be patient, it takes a while for a CVL to turn into a referral to MANO, but Steven Cooklin's presentation (slides 8 and 9) show that the 'case enquiries' and 'cases signed' are both accelerating away.

For case enquiries, looking at the Half-on-Half figures - they have increase by 5%, then 12%, 20%, 34% over the last four periods. So, a nice progression that indicates an accelerating trend rather than a catch-up blip. Similarly, for the cases signed.

It'll take some further time to see this work through to the P&L and it'll certainly not be visible in next months Full Year 2023 Results. However, the following half-year may well look better - and when the figures flow through they will look even better set against soft comparators.

Posted at 20/4/2023 07:15 by jonwig
Trading update no doubt prompted by the share price:

Probably leaked that the H2 profit wouldn't be enough to cover the H1 loss:

Whilst subject to full audit, after a PBT loss of £(5.5)m for H1 FY23, the Company expects to report a PBT profit of £1.6m for H2 FY23. Consequently, the Board expects the PBT loss for the full year ended 31 March 2023 to be £(3.9)m

Paradise delayed.

Posted at 28/3/2023 14:59 by sallad3

My problem is that the Moulton case now reveals the extraordinary extent that the MANO model is mainly to provide massive amounts of money to Licensed Insolvency Practitioners and their solicitors/barristers without any external review on the payments.

The CityLink numbers just don't add up. Payment in the AIM prospectus was £115k not £125k for 100% then MANO paid more and then told us they gave up 10% when they didn't and all along it seems to have been a device to enrich EY and "pump up" the MANO asset value on listing.

That's why I have always had my doubts about the valuation of the Cartel cases when so many of the smaller IPs have written it off.

For EY to go straight from Administration only to then restore solely to assist MANO and ensure that MANO agrees to pay them (with only a little bit for the creditors) 5% of the Gross (a vast amount) by changing the deal disclosed in the prospectus doesn't now and never has really passed the smell test. Inevitably one has to wonder about the valuation then and now.

The write off of the most recent lost big case just heightens my fears. Given the basis of that case as revealed in the Court of Appeal documents I really don't see how anyone could have written up the value beyond purely speculative.

MANO exists as a "scare the pants off everyone" business - a bit like a well disgused bailiff business. Yes there is a need for that in many cases but the valuation model seems to have been rather too hyped in the past.

Still the proof of the pudding is yet to come. See you at the AGM?

Posted at 27/3/2023 18:09 by sallad3

I'm digging around in the Jon Moulton (City Link and 26+% shareholder in MANO) truck cartel numbers and wondered if you can recall any further specifics to assist in coming up with support for the valuation of (..£6k..?) per tractor etc.

The various Companies House records show that at the date of the administration there were 2,600 hired vehicles (cars, vans forklifts, tractors and trailers). Can you recall if Steve C has ever given a unit number for claims for the Moulton vehicles ?

The claims were 100% assigned to MANO for £125k and the company then dissolved.

Subsequently it had to be restored on 20.11.19 and placed in liquidation SOLELY to help MANO's cartel case (EY's words not mine).

MANO's RNS of 14 July 2020 stated that "On the [..City Link claim...] £125,000 was paid in initial consideration ... but Manolete owns a 90/10 split of the net proceeds."

That doesn't seem to be the case given EY's latest report.

MANO has actually agreed to underwriting ALL the costs of the liquidation AND the EY liquidators remuneration and expenses. EY's fees to be paid by MANO are 5% of the GROSS (yes GROSS not net) and a further minimum sum of £50k (capped at £180k) plus all costs to close the liquidation.

That's an awful lot of money for EY with the benefit to creditors capped at a maximum £600k. and only £41,821.50 on the EY time clock at £550 per hour.

It's a potentially very very big cost to MANO when the whole principal of the Moulton deal was he assigned 100% to MANO before the AIM listing and he was to be the sole remaining substantial shareholder.

The Guernsey press reported in 2022 that:
"Now he plans to keep his head down, investing his own wealth through his family office – one of his top investments is in London-listed litigation funder Manolete Partners. 'We've made a fortune on that. We own about 26 per cent which didn't cost us very much.' The company is now worth around £240m."

I'm struggling to see the realism of the £13.2m Cartel valuation in the absence of meaningful volume of vehicles nombers, and there is a loss to be reported for FY23 anyway per last RNS that relies on no Cartel writedown being necessary.

Perhaps we might get further detail in the promised April update.

Any help or AGM or other meeting recollections gratefully appreciated.

Posted at 15/2/2023 17:55 by sallad3

The Judgment is from the Tribunal, specific to BT and RM, and subject to umpteen appeals so a long way to go yet.

Readers should look at last year's accounts:

There is no independent review whatsoever. It is always done by the lawyers acting for Manolete on the case.

1. Written Assessments Are Obtained From External Solicitors Or Primary Counsel Working On The Case On Behalf Of The Company.

An External Opinion Is requested From Counsel Or A Solicitor Who Is Working On the Case Which Provides An Independent Description Of that Reporting Period Ends, A Sample Of Open Case Investments For Which E merits Of The Case

2. Approach to cartel case valuation: In reaching a valuation for our cartel cases, we undertook a specific and detailed review process, as follows: we attributed each of our 22 cartel cases into 3 tiers relating to the level of data and evidence held in respect of these cases. In conjunction with an external valuation report from Collyer Bristow and an external opinion of legal prospects from a QC, we applied a discount to the valuation provided by Collyer Bristow, with the lower discount for the tier 1 cases (those with the most data) and higher discount for the tier 3 cases (those with the lower level of data)


Collyer Bristow are a firm of lawyers who are the SOLE instructed solicitors on MANO's single consolidated Cartel case. They have a vested interest in the outcome for their client.

This Collyers problem has existed since before MANO was listed. I recall addressing it with concern some years ago.

Public record at hTTps://

Mano -v- 27 different Truck manufacturers

Given that Crofts' solicitors were telling their clients back in 2020:
"The approximate value can be calculated by identifying how many trucks you bought between 1997 and 2011 and applying a 10% to 15% figure* to them all. This would give the approximate value of the claim." (NB trucks over 6 tonnes between 1997 and 2011.)

The final judgment seems to be only one-third of that.

I do think it would be a good idea for the BOD to give an early update as the year end is only 6 weeks away.

Posted at 14/2/2023 09:41 by sallad3
Will be interesting to see the impact of last week's Cartel decision on MANO's valuation of "The Cartel cases".

My quick take is that the award of 5% damages of "total value of commerce" is largely based on chassis alone prices (est 20%) and the total 10,000 trucks.

We know next to nothing about the number of trucks in tne MANO cases so perhaps the BOD will give us un early update on how the BT/RM £15,277,965 amount (pre interest) compares to the carrying value of £13,200,000 in MANO's accounts. NB all of last year's profit was attributable to the £5+M uplift on the Cartel cases.

Can anyone shed any more light on the implied >7,500 trucks in MANO's portfolio?

Posted at 30/9/2022 09:01 by sallad3

My own battles with IPs (and their US equivalents) have been going on for more than 30 years. As you say most are publicly available for anyone to read.

It is those years of experience that leads to the questions that I ask. My question was not where does Mano profit but a simple "do the profits of Mano exceed the returns to creditors", and in many many cases the USP of Mano is to ensure that it does because the net proceeds go to pay IPs and their solicitors - the "outrageous" Traxx 25% for the IP in addition to his already accrued fees rather says it all.

Is that a sustainable business model?

The questions I ask are not the moral ones of should such egregious profiteering and fee-gouging be allowed in a civilized society.

If you read my prior Mano posts you will find my view is that the Mano business model is, in concept, a good one. It's in the execution that questions arise - not least hiding major losses. Following this share for years seems to be raising more questions as time goes by.

We now have the CEO publicly stating that a still sitting Judge, who is a Director of Mano, is telling IPs that they should always use the Mano route as a first choice. Judicial independence is the bedrock of any society that tries to adhere to the rule of law.

Investing in Mano is. to a greater or lesser extent, a moral choice. Questioning compliance with LSE and Company law compliance obligations is not.

Posted at 29/9/2022 15:24 by sallad3

The adage "once bitten twice shy" comes to mind. Best to understand the whole business as far as one can.

The big "lost cause" had final order of the Court filed on 8 July, including the "consequential matters" (leave to appeal costs etc), after the judgment was handed down on 24 June. IMHO Mano were obliged to report it to shareholders more than 2 months before they did, and certainly on the date the order was sealed (which gave them 2 weeks to research it) and there was never any possible appeal to the High Court as you seem to think, because the judgment was made by a Judge. There was simply no excuse for delay. If I had bought after 8 July I would be tempted to seek redress.

The Mano business model is simply one of making threats. Recoveries benefit mostly Mano, IPs and their solicitors which is Mano's USP. Creditors get the bits left over - if any.

All Mano's cases can also be seen by typing "manolete" into the search box on hTTps://

There is a lot of activity.

Any interested shareholder can then follow up on the CE-file site to the publicly available documents (fees £11 or £22).

The Traxx (Aggregates) case (issued 1 September 2022) is an interesting one to follow given that the Administrator reports (per Companies House) that there is unlikely to be any payment to unsecured creditors, and its mostly about his (personal 25%) and his solicitors accrued fees. Mano paid £10k upfront and an undisclosed share of any recoveries in Summer 2020.

The Zipp International case is an interesting one. Settlement £800k. Mano took £369,470.05. Claim is publicly available which shows the amount claimed to enable comparison against the achieved settlement. It was a funded case. IP and solicitors were the principal beneficiaries of the remaining ex-Mano funds which is the Mano business model exemplified.

Will be interesting to see how the future plays out in this lawyers and accountants gravy train arena. Will/can the Mano shareholders benefit as much as they think? Interesting to wonder if the shareholders returns will exceed the payments to creditors.

DYOR as always.

Manolete Partners share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
Manolete P..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

Log in to ADVFN
Register Now

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 |

V: D: 20230602 22:20:29