Mbl Share Discussion Threads

[davidlloyd] 16/3/2011 08:41

The more information being dug up, the more interconnected everything seems to become (not, perhaps, suprising). It would appear that AIM rules have been bent beyond belief (nay broken?). And what action will be taken? Nothing I suspect. ANd some of those involved continue to operate as officers of other listed companies.

DL

[miamisteve] 16/3/2011 07:20

Livesey is also a shareholder in the company. Clearly related party transactions which should have required shareholder approval.

Machin - I don't think davidosh has had his head in the sand over this. He has been concerned about the corporate governance of the company for a long while and has been pressing for improvements. The reason it has been ineffectual is down to the lack of integrity of Allan and Cowgill and the lack of AIM regulation. Cowgill seemed quite assuring at the meetings that we would have additional non-execs., better communication and that Allan's related party activity was fully investegated and above board.

[ldmachin] 16/3/2011 00:53

You do pick'em davidosh.

Instead of having these cosy mello meetings where you invite scumbag self-serving CEOs of AIM companies to tout their dodgy companies to fool.co.uk fellows to lose their savings on. Why not actually set-up meetings to expose these crooks... undercover cameras and all that, asking difficult questions to get reactions, etc, etc. Far better use of your time and you might become a hero for it.

[encarter] 16/3/2011 00:13

Could be another bloodbath tomorrow for these with all the bad news and shenanigans there could be quite a few shareholders jumping ship including some big holders. I'd be on the phone to my broker at 7.30.

[someuwin] 15/3/2011 22:03

I can't believe anyone was still holding up until today. The writing's been on the wall here for months.

[timesmoney] 15/3/2011 21:59

Offer period! Absolute nonsense. Going broke period more like.
And when they do go broke which is more than likely a detailed DTI investigation will follow. I would rather be outside lookin in,than inside looking out!
Top of the list for the DTI
U Explore deal
Related party transactions
Bonus payments
At the very least expect sanctions on the directors, at the worst a whole world of pain.

[craftycolin] 15/3/2011 21:45

going back to the Livesley link earlier;

The current application for the build on the Darwen site are Reno Global, details below;

Applicant:
Mr S Meredith
Reno Global
C/O Hurlston Brook Ltd
202 Merlin Park
Ringtail Road
Burscough
Lancashire
L40 8JY

Details on this company are very few and far between, but 'S Meredith' is Steve Meredith, and happens to be married to Kathryn Meredith, sales manager at U-Explore, the company strangely purchased by MBL within the last year.

Not that this means anything on its own, but seems to be indicative of the culture MBL operate within

[the analyst] 15/3/2011 21:25

Of course, the usual chain of events once a company has gone into administration results in private investors get nothing

I don't know if holders here have enough voting power to make a difference to what looks to be the inevitable?

I hope so, for their sake...

[the analyst] 15/3/2011 21:17

"RBCRBC - 15 Mar'11 - 20:45 - 3700 of 3700

Would an MBO attempt at 20p surprise anyone ?"


Yes, it would surprise me

I would be more inclined to think they would burn through the cash under the guise of 'trying' to do the best for shareholders, then once that cash has gone, take the company into administration.

[rbcrbc] 15/3/2011 20:45

Would an MBO attempt at 20p surprise anyone ?

With the Mkt Cap at 2.68m TA could buy the rest of the co. with last years pay check.

[brwo349] 15/3/2011 20:32

Author: emirecords New Fool Contributor Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 132247
Subject: MBL new warehouse Date: 27/02/2011 02:15
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 9

Interesting to note that it looks likely that MBL are not moving into their new warehouse complex in Darwen, Blackburn

Situated on the old Royal Ordnance site, Roman Road, Lower Darwen, the building is now up for sale with agent Mark Brearley, 01274 595999

So what does that tell us all about the Morrison's contract?

The building application in 2007 was submitted by Livesey Construction Group, of Walton Summit, Preston
Run by a certain Allan Livesey, he is listed as the main shareholder of U-Explore, MBL's £2m investment for 15% last June

Anyone else aware of these facts
MBL and Cowgill just don't seem to be forthright in telling us shareholders what they are doing with our money!

[essentialinvestor] 15/3/2011 20:20

Great call by CR on this.

Embarrassed that I looked at this this for about 5 minutes last year, lucky escape, although we all make mistakes.

[masurenguy] 15/3/2011 20:15

DesWalker - 15 Mar'11 - 20:08 - 3696: Why are they in an Offer Period ? Nobody has made an Offer....It's almost like they're using this ruse for no other reason than to avoid communicating with shareholders.

It just gets worse, doesn't it !

[deswalker] 15/3/2011 20:08

In the meantime, I can't see ukdt getting any answers to his questions as MBL have reverted to their default position ("under the rules of the Takeover Code, MBL is now in an offer period") which puts them in purdah.

This is a very good point. Why are they in an Offer Period ? Nobody has made an Offer - all that has happened is that KPMG have been instructed to look for a buyer. These things happen all the time behind the scenes at companies and they don't feel the need to announce this to the market and even if they do then claim to be in an Offer Period. It's almost like they're using this ruse for no other reason than to avoid communicating with shareholders.

Personally I think KPMG have some serious questions to answer here:

1) What were the conclusions of the Strategic Review ?
2) Is it them who advise on this repeated Offer Period nonsense ?
3) Are they acting in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders or the best interests of the Board who is instructing them ?

[jeffian] 15/3/2011 19:53

Interesting that Cinram, although substantially bigger, seems to have been suffering similar problems itself! It suffered the loss of a major client last year (Warner Home Video), required a "refinancing and recapitalization" and has negative shareholder equity on the balance sheet.

"The refinancing and recapitalization transaction is a significant and positive development for Cinram and removes the uncertainty that has impacted the Fund following the announcement of the loss of the Warner Home Video contract a year ago" commented John Bell, Cinram's Chief Financial Officer."

Although it's an unholy mess, the one (tiny) good thing is that at least MBL has no debt, so we're not beholden to the banks or other lenders taking over the process. As ever it's in the hands of the Allan family and surely taking it private must be somewhere quite high up the agenda. In the meantime, I can't see ukdt getting any answers to his questions as MBL have reverted to their default position ("under the rules of the Takeover Code, MBL is now in an offer period") which puts them in purdah.

Poor old Steve Walsh-Hill must be feeling a bit sick about his recent share purchases (but not as sick as I do about mine!).

[cockneyrebel] 15/3/2011 19:48

Why doesn't somebody here write to the press and document all the goings on?

There's the T.A connected satellite businesses that supplied MUBL too and other malarky - a good investigation by an FT investigative journo should draw attention to what's gone on.

Cowgill has overseen this and he heads two other listed co's, investors there should be made aware.

What about his £300k cash options - little wonder he didn't want shares.

I tell you what, if I was on the receiving end of this I'd make sure I got even at the very least.

CR

[jeff h] 15/3/2011 18:50

New Morrisons distributor:-

[masurenguy] 15/3/2011 17:45

An insightful post from ukdt on TMF this afternoon !

There are some very large institutional investors in MBL and many will have put their faith and belief in Peter Cowgill as did a lot of private investors judging by comments made even on this thread. He is the very successful head of JD Sports a fully listed FTSE 250 company with an excellent track record.
Peter Cowgill is the only non executive director. He also answered all the questions in the shareholder meeting I attended 18 months ago and was the director that was most vociferous in the conference call for shareholders six months ago. He surely has a reputation at stake in all this mess !?

Another conference call would be very useful as I would like to ask him as follows;

A) Why did you state by RNS that the Morrisons contract was three years through to 2012 ?



The Board of MBL Group plc, the UK distributor of home entertainment products, is pleased to announce that it has signed a new 3 year contract with Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc ('Morrisons') for the supply of Morrisons entertainment into 2012. The contract covers the supply of CDs, DVDs/BluRay and all Games formats.

That was signed and RNS dated 22nd June 2009 but here in March 2011 just 21 months later shareholders hear it is ending this year after just two years and will not be through to 2012 !! Have we been stupid to believe the first RNS ?

B) Why was it not highlighted in previous Annual Reports (even before that contract) that Morrisons was 75% of the business and how can directors take such vast salaries and bonuses for delivering on such risk and flawed contracts that now seem to be disputed on payment of stock by Morrisons ? Directors took £1.5m in bonuses just months ago which is shocking in the full light of information now known.

C) What is happening at U-Xplore other than shareholders finding out that £2m appears to have been thrown at a private a company with accounts that state my corner launderette took more money last year and yet Peter Cowgill and his board valued it at £13m. Where is the due diligence that all boards must undertake when spending shareholders money ?

D) In the Annual report this year it states that the company have signed a 15year lease for a new office and warehouse. My property knowledge is such that I know a 15 year lease should be registered with the Land Registry. Anyone interested in buying the freehold title or lending money against it would then know the lease information transacted against it. For some reason the information is in the AR but nothing whatsoever is lodged with the Land Registry. Can Mr Cowgill please explain that ?

E) Why did MBL sign a 15 year lease in any event ? The company only had nine months guaranteed before a potential contract termination (as we now know ?) with Morrisons the very major customer which we also now know. Who is really benefitting from a 15 year lease ? I am sure any company with a good property agent acting for them would have screwed down a landlord into a fabulous post credit crunch deal for big warehousing in the north of England for their client. Who was the agent they need to be questioned and their fees reclaimed ?

F) What is happening about the remaining stock as the story keeps changing there too ? How much WILL Morrisons be paying and with a 100% guarantee please signed by their chairman not just our directors ?

I dislike the fact that every announcement creates even more questions. Shareholders deserve better with a FTSE chairman and an FD with a brother who is the head of Tesco. Bring on the conference call as the last one answered very little apart from telling us that the chairman has an expensive car to run ? This farce needs to end.



I doubt he'll hold his breath waiting for clear answers to the above questions though !

[timesmoney] 15/3/2011 14:52

Can't imagine any of the 320 (soon to be ex)staff and the friends and family going there. Nor any current or past shareholders or supliers.

[typo56] 15/3/2011 14:36

But was the writing always on the wall? Faced with a business that's declining anyway they're possibly better off with their bonuses, dividends and related party transactions, than without them?

It's not as if they've invested their remunerations unwisely. They've always got their thriving restaurant business to fall back on. It is thriving, isn't it?

[timesmoney] 15/3/2011 13:43

If it's any consolation to the shareholders the Allan family Trevor, James and Tonya have effectively 'lost' £13m between them today. From a recent high of £1.90 to worthless. Makes Trevor's £1m bonus the worst buisness decision of the decade. A close second is Peter Cowgills decision to watch it happen (and to take £300k to help with his petrol costs)Sunday lunch round at the Allans should be interesting.
Consider James as well, not only does he have to watch his MBL share value disapear down the khazi, his business's only customer just dissapeared. MBL will not be needing his 'third party' entirely legitimate buying skills anymore.

[supernumerary] 15/3/2011 13:01

miamisteve - 'Makes TA and PC bonuses all the more shameful and certainly wouldn't have helped the tender process.' And don't forget a rather tasty dividend too ;-)

[knowing] 15/3/2011 12:54

Talk about all your eggs in one basket.