We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mbl Group Plc | LSE:MUBL | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B0W48T45 | ORD 7.5P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 3.50 | - | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | N/A | 0 |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
26/8/2011 08:51 | David, We will certainly get a chance to ask management as PC has agreed to attend a meeting early in September along with Trevor Allan hopefully so that questions relating to these results can be answered. There will also be an AGM of course but with the delayed results and ongoing events I cannot see that being arranged before late October and I think we need answers now! I think one should be very wary about meeting in an environment outside the AGM. Better to have these discussions in formal surroundings with company advisors, lawyers and all Directors present IMO. Less formal "assurances" might actually be very counterproductive and suit management down to the ground as they allow a diffusion of the tension over a couple of months and over a number of geographic locations. Consequently I would urge a rethink of such a meeting. The AGM should be the scene of ALL our "issues" not a number of satellite meetings IMO. Numerous semi-formal meetings/conference calls have meant diddly-squat so far so why should another one. Better to have it all out in one place in a formal setting IMNVHO. Waiting an extra six weeks is not going to make much difference. Beware being sold a line in an earlier meeting that leads to a diminishing of the attendance and lessens the discussion at the AGM. Let's hope PC sets the AGM for a reasonable time and date to facililate people's travel arrangements. I'm sure he realises that people will want to attend so his remit as indpendent non-exec should also involve making that as easy as possible. Des | deswalker | |
26/8/2011 08:38 | Does he still pay himself around 2 million a year David ? | 34simon | |
26/8/2011 08:37 | So Livesey gets 2 years rent 1.2m gbp, and all of the digital business, I guess including U-xplore is valued at 400k. | miamisteve | |
26/8/2011 08:37 | Just out of interest can anyone work out the likely amount still in discussion for payment and to be resolved with Morrisons ? It is made clear that GMV and particularly the Sainsbury website will be sold. Any ideas on valuation there ? One positive is that Windsong is performing well ! If the business is in a sound position to continue when all the issues with Morrisons and asset sales are completed then at least two new directors will be required. The other option would be for TA to make a satisfactory offer to the other shareholders and let him continue off market in the way he thought was acceptable as a listed company ! I wonder how long PC will want things to continue with him under the spotlight ? I suspect my latter option will be the most likely. | davidosh | |
26/8/2011 08:35 | I would hope future director remuneration would be aligned with the new reality of what the business can afford. Is that likely? | alter ego | |
26/8/2011 08:33 | Thta may be true but do you trust management? No. IMO they now have two courses of action open to them. The first is to continue in the same vein, the second is to try and earn some trust back following these fiascos. I don't know which course they'll follow but I have a niggling feeling it might just be the latter in which case a buy at these prices would seem to be good value against that Balance Sheet. Needless to say I won't be buying any more but equally see no reason to sell the ones I've got. Downside is 10p, upside could well be a fair bit more. It's all a tax loss for me some day anyway :o( IMO, DYOR | deswalker | |
26/8/2011 08:31 | We will certainly get a chance to ask management as PC has agreed to attend a meeting early in September along with Trevor Allan hopefully so that questions relating to these results can be answered. There will also be an AGM of course but with the delayed results and ongoing events I cannot see that being arranged before late October and I think we need answers now! | davidosh | |
26/8/2011 08:30 | Does that "what's left" include the (undisclosed) level of stock and creditor balances that they still haven't resolved. | typo56 | |
26/8/2011 08:22 | Thta may be true but do you trust management? | jonc | |
26/8/2011 07:54 | What's left is worth more than the share price IMO. Serious questions need revisiting about who benefitted from the warehouse and U Xplore fiasco and where was the non-exec in monitoring these decisions. I'm sure they will ... | deswalker | |
26/8/2011 07:48 | "It is acknowledged that prima facie the investment in U Explore appears to have taken place at a high valuation." LOL! | someuwin | |
26/8/2011 07:43 | Wot no comment!! | jonc | |
17/8/2011 11:43 | Thanks for advice, decided to play safe and sell 25k in 2 lots, a friend also sold 17.5k as well, we all got 10.3p, we felt too risky to hold for now. | 34simon | |
16/8/2011 19:06 | Value needs to be judged against liabilities and therefore news on the new warehouse situation is probably the most important news, without a settlement there any sale proceeds will end up with the landlord not the shareholders. | rbcrbc | |
16/8/2011 18:52 | ps me and the missus hold together approx 25k so wondering wether to ride or cash in and while the price is very low 10.5p is a lot higher than the 9p quoted on the screen. | 34simon | |
16/8/2011 18:50 | Thanks Jeffian/Davidosh. From briefly reading the last 100 posts or so do you think there's value here or is it avoid at all costs ? Also is there money needed for redundancies or is that already covered ? | 34simon | |
16/8/2011 18:46 | 34Simon....MUBL cannot sell UXplore as a whole company as they only own a minority stake and therefore need to find a buyer for their shareholding. It is not a subsiduary. I suspect that the only buyer is likely to be another shareholder in UXplore. | davidosh | |
16/8/2011 18:40 | 34Simon, One of them is not "obviously UExplore" because UExplore isn't a subsidiary of MBL! It is a quite separate private company in which we (inexplicably) made an investment of £2m. See my post 4125 jeffian - 8 Aug'11 - 09:58 - 4125 of 4143 edit As ever with MBL, the announcement on 29/7 seems to raise more questions than it answers. Most of the separate subsidiaries of MBL are held within 2 companies - Redworth and Air Music & Media Copywright - the 2 others being Global Media Vault and Maximum Entertainment, so the discussions to sell 2 subsidiaries could either mean they are selling the meat of the business or they they are getting rid of the peripheral stuff and going back to core business. | jeffian | |
16/8/2011 18:26 | Also if they are selling two of the subsidiaries, one is obviously UExplore but what is the other, is that the business that supplies Sainsburys ? Just trying to guess if there's any value here at a market cap under 2 million. | 34simon | |
16/8/2011 18:16 | Surely not a short as how could you get your hands on that kind of stock in the first place to short, Mubl is too illiquid, how many times do you see that kind of price for a dummy sale and that kind of size, who would want that kind of size and why in Mubl right now ? | 34simon | |
16/8/2011 18:09 | Short closing? | jonc | |
16/8/2011 18:00 | Selftrade would let you sell 150k at 10.5p today on a 9-11p spread. Usually in Mubl the normal size is around 10-15k so why would a mm buy 150k in one go and pay almost the offer price for it ? | 34simon | |
12/8/2011 09:51 | Well they are bidding 10p now for 100k on that 8.5p bid. Buy order? | love it | |
10/8/2011 13:21 | Sorry to see this. Why are they bidding for 100k on line at 9.85p and only buy 1k at full offer? | love it | |
10/8/2011 12:21 | "Cowgill seems to be out to make the point that JD. were targetted because they offer an attractive "retail proposition"." I'd assumed they were targeted because the rioters were drawn from their customer base! | jeffian |
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