Wasps 22 Discussion Threads

[135791113] 29/9/2022 11:23

@BigFish - trying to blame the FCA is not going to get you very far, and is a dead end IMO. Wasps have produced independent valuations of the stadium and the only way any of it can be that investors were misled is if Wasps either withheld information or gave knowingly false information to the valuers, both of which would class as fraud. You were free to get your own independent assessment if you were sceptical of the one provided as to the value of the security of the bond.

From what I can see there is no fraud, and investors have not been misled. The stadium's valuation may be optimistic, and the business plan presented 6 years ago may have been optimistic, but that is different to fraud and with Covid in the middle of the term it's very hard to say what the outcome would have been otherwise. Clearly no business plan was written with that in mind. If you do believe the stadium's valuation was wrong, then your case is against the valuers, not Wasps Finance, but proving that a valuation from 6 years ago, or 2 years ago, was so wrong that it was negligent or fraudulent will be almost impossible.

[anonbondtrader] 29/9/2022 08:20

I can confirm that the bond is blocked from trading in both Crest and Euroclear since the deregister from the LSE, also unable to certificate it too...

[grahamg8] 28/9/2022 17:11

Check out www.waspsbondholders.co.uk to make sure you haven't missed anything and get your voice heard.

[addition] 28/9/2022 13:59

@cornichabra. Welcome and let's hope this all plays out. You should have received various communications from the trustee via AJB already. Can you check your account and tell us if you have them? If you don't then there is a plumbing problem either with a broker not getting them or not passing them on (which I'd find hard to imagine). Some bondholders are getting notifications and others are not and it would be good to know if you are or if you're not.

[cornichabra] 28/9/2022 13:37

Hi All, new to this thread and a small Wasps bondholder but really don't want this investment to go up in smoke! My broker is A J Bell and i wrote to them today requesting clarification for future comms and how to process any corporate actions as the Trustee has stated to me that (despite recognising my holding) instructions will need to come from my broker.

[bigfish1] 27/9/2022 13:26

Crest must be working because the brokers received and eventually passed on the notices issued by Wasps on the 29th of July, 2nd of September etc.

[addition] 27/9/2022 12:12

@bigfish. The email at the FCA is [e-mail] This is the "market integrity unit" not some black-hole. State the facts about the de-listing politely, don't be accusatory and perhaps ask them how the de-listing is benefiting investors. Some may think that having been locked out of the secondary market has been a problem, some may not care. Don't expect an immediate response but I imagine when the inbox fills up, they might recognise this as something worth looking at. Even if the FCA does take action to re-list then it won't change the fact that bondholders are in a negotiation with Wasps and the FCA won't be able to influence what happens. Which is why the trustee needs to get involved by way of the extraordinary resolution (unless they say their involvement is redundant in some way??)

In terms of USBank, they have their reputation to protect and so you might expect them to consider this in how they deal with bondholders (ie, they are probably taking this very seriously albeit it may not fee like that). Have you been given a timeline for when the letter to bondholders will go out and if it does, do they even know that it will make its way through CREST to the brokers and investors? Can ANYONE confirm if Crest is working or not?

[bigfish1] 27/9/2022 09:44

10% Of the bondholders have already requested a bondholder meeting (on the 8th of September) but the Trustee is dragging his heels and I'm starting to feel that they are more interested in protecting US Bank and the Issuers interests than the bondholders. An official notice has still not been sent out after 2 weeks and there is a 3 week notice period after that so events have overtaken us. In terms of administration the problem is that valuations of the arena relied upon it being part of a going concern and not an insolvent company. I doubt if the arena is worth a fraction of the ridiculous valuations paid for by Wasps, even if ACL doesn't forfeit the lease. I have submitted a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman asking the FCA to investigate the whole sorry situation as I believe investors were misled by the offering circular, which the FCA approved, and that it was negligent of the FCA to allow the delisting of a bond on which the issuer had defaulted. I suggest everyone use this post, and others, as a basis for making their own complaints to the Financial Ombudsman and the FCA. @addition - do you know a better way of getting the FCA involved?

[addition] 26/9/2022 20:37

Thincat1. It's possible that when the bonds were delisted that CREST stopped working because bonds stopped trading. If that happened then that would explain why CREST isn't forwarding to brokers. It could also be that there is no fee payable to bondholders attached to the notification. US Bank should use RNS for time being otherwise investors will be disadvantaged.

Talking of being disadvantaged, some investors are probably asking what role the FCA has had in bondholders not being able to trade bonds. When did the FCA know there was a problem and what have they done to allow bondholders access to the market? This has Panorama Part 2 written all over it.

[thincat1] 26/9/2022 19:45

@addition: No, I'm not aware of anyone getting information from the Trustee via CREST and their broker. I suspect CREST are not passing the Trustee notices on to any platform, which explains why so few bondholders have engaged. It's disappointing that HL didn't put the Trustee's contact details in today's communique, as I suggested.

[addition] 26/9/2022 19:26

@bobswest. Go easy on HL, it's not their fault. They cannot in any way advise you what to do because they like all other execution only brokers are not permitted to provide advice and so they will steer away from being seen to direct/guide/influence. Hence the regurgitation. That said, they probably should provide a generic how to guide for this type of situation.

[addition] 26/9/2022 19:21

@thincat1 ... Do you know of anyone who has received any communication via their broker that has come via CREST? I ask because it's possible that CREST fell to bits when the bonds were delisted. Would be useful to know if anyone can shed some light on that. If US Bank is reading this then you might want to use RNS to get to the full audience.

[addition] 26/9/2022 19:12

@thincat1 ... I feel the frustration. US Bank cannot do anything until bondholders tell them to on sufficient numbers. Also, it is worth knowing that US Bank won't know any more than you about whether a refi is real or not (you could look at the track record of their communications as an indicator). US Bank cannot go in demanding anything until told to by bondholders. And then, it'll get you a seat at the table and you will get to see what's in offer if anything. As it stands, Wasps has you where they want you, sitting quietly in the corner and impotent. I saw in the Wasps announcement that they were looking to protect their interests, not bondholders - tells you how they are playing this. Please, get organised. If there is just one big investor out there, it might like to make itself known.

[addition] 26/9/2022 18:56

@bigfish1 ... US Bank won't do anything until told to by 10% of bondholders under an extraordinary resolution or 25% if you want to instruct him to accelerate immediately (but I think you know that). Are there 10% yet who can request an extraordinary meeting? If yes, then there is a way forward. Right now Wasps is relying on bondholders not being able to organise themselves which is pretty diabolical. If you can get organised (meaning you can act with one voice) then you can push back.

[bobswest] 26/9/2022 18:18

I have received an update today from HL which just regurgitates the last update put out by Wasps a couple of weeks ago. No mention of the Trustee, and no mention of Wasps subsequently appointing someone to potentially act as Administrator. Totally pointless and out of date - which I will point out to whatever hapless HL employee wrote it.

[bigfish1] 26/9/2022 13:06

I have tried all the same arguments and am feeling pretty frustrated at the trustees refusal to act. I am wondering what is the point of having a trustee? If the company goes into administration we end up in the same position as we would be if there was no trustee involved.

[thincat1] 26/9/2022 11:58

I’ve spoken to Laurence Griffiths at the Trustee. I tried to persuade him (a) to explain why the Trustee had not acted last week, (b) to explain under what circumstances they would act without a bondholder vote, such as if the Issuer went into administration and (c) to publish their legal advice. I was entirely unsuccessful. While unfailingly pleasant and patient, he is unwilling to go beyond a narrow definition of the Trustee’s role. There may be, he agrees, circumstances in which the Trustee would act unilaterally, but he wouldn’t define them.

I also suggested he could ask the Issuer for evidence that refinancing negotiations were underway and not just a pretence, but again this wasn’t what Trustees do.

I feel frustrated, but I don’t know enough about the Trustee’s role and the mechanics of a company going into administration to know whether there is anything more we can do.

What do others think?

[grahamg8] 25/9/2022 09:52

PUSB, I suspect you are right. If a creditor meeting is convened they would have to approve/or not the appointment. The Trustee on our behalf being the majority creditor could insist on an administrator of our choice. And I think we would want that. The last thing we want is Wasps cosying up to a management friendly FRP. This is where Wasps lack of communication works in our favour as the Trustee can only ask for direction from the Bond holders it knows about. The great majority won't get a say unless Wasps tells USBank who they are. Which then means we can manage 25% vote on a whole range of matters, which at present seems a potential stumbling block.

[pusb] 24/9/2022 09:50

Wasps have appointed FRP to be their administrators in case of moving from the intent to enter administration to actually entering administration. The total lack of Trustees action despite multiple actual or potential defaults is worrying - who are they protecting? I understand that objection could be raised to company appointed administrators and an alternative appointed. That sounds as if it would be in bondholders best interests - we must ensure the Trustee will act accordingly and in a timely fashion,

[pusb] 23/9/2022 12:43

Barondene - I suspect things have moved on politically since Ann Lucas’s day. The conservative councillors supported the deal after a meeting in camera, not entirely sure they would repeat that stance given that many of the reasons for not wanting to deal with SISU have come to pass with Wasps.

I suppose also, if the council consider a well established arena complex to be a white elephant, would business people not also see it in similar light.

I totally agree with your last comment. Wasps will no doubt be desperately trying to avoid that scenario.

Newcombe 12 - it does make you wonder where that interest payment 8 going to come from.

[pusb] 23/9/2022 12:38

Ozzie-dog Apologies and I agree that information should be shared. However, on initial reading, it seemed as if you were more “in the know” rather than repeating Bobby Bridge’s article.

[newcome12] 23/9/2022 11:24

I think the whole HMRC thing is a bit of a distraction; it's probably more to do with not having the £2m bond interest payment due shortly!

[barondene] 23/9/2022 09:44

PUSB

There are two things Coventry Council do not want:

The whole Arena / WASPs to fail. Ann Lucas said

“People had different views to start with but after hours of meetings and the chance to ask questions of officers, and Wasps owner Derek Richardson, we felt this was the best deal for taxpayers, football fans, rugby supporters and Coventry as a whole.”

To take back a white elephant stadium that requires (reported) £21m of repairs and upgrades

So I would not rule out Richardson's assertions he is close to a deal. The announcement this week is to add pressure to get it through

This might be good news for the Bondholders but we do not know at what cost to them

They would certainly know more if they appointed their own, non WASPS connected, Receiver