ajacko
16 Feb 2017
Legal dispute Well having being embroiled in a legal dispute with Slater and Gordon over the £50 million in escrow, it seems we now in a legal dispute with Aviva Canada over their failure to pay invoices, no idea what sums involved. Let's hope we can win these!
winningstreak
16 Feb 2017
AVIVA Who is in the wrong here, Aviva or Watchstone? (See RNS) My bet is that Watchstone, with its 'colourful' history, is in the wrong and will be the loser on this one.IMHO,ws
oilovlam
20 Jan 2017
Re: Update sNorman, I partially agree with you. Positive news is as important as negative news for an investor to make a balanced decision. Part of the 'problem' most investors face is that they tend to seek out information that reinforces their own view of a stock....whether that is good or bad. So information that tests my comfortable view of the world can be useful. But, equally all sources of information cannot be treated equal. Even on these bulletin boards there are people who I trust more than others and some I distrust entirely. The 'Share Prophet' articles on QPP were mostly accurate.....but I think the primary source of the information was not the (big headed) person who took the credit...I believe the source was a disgruntled analyst who had worked for the QPP broker, I believe he had inside information and fed the 'skeletons in the cupboard' to 'you know who' (Voldemort??). I don't expect the source for the current information is likely to be as accurate....the author is probably delving into the sewer of his own mind and trying to stir things up. That doesn't mean that the current 'information' you refer to is totally incorrect but equally, I don't trust the author because I think he is unbalanced, vindictive and biased. I also don't want to support the bloke by accessing his website.
safarinorman
20 Jan 2017
Re: Update Hi Oilovlam,it does not matter the reasons if someone posts positive or negative information on any share, but information or thoughts let us each make our own decision to buy or sell or avoid by reading all the views.I have no personal information on WTG or SG but I am interested to see if the shares should be avoided until further information is known.I am happy with positive and negative information, which is good for small investors because we are the last to normally be told.
strapuk
20 Jan 2017
Re: Update Yes.
oilovlam
20 Jan 2017
Re: Update sNorman, this unknown 'information' at 'share prophets' wouldn't be unsubstantiated speculation by a 'certain' person with a grudge against QPP/WTG, would it?
safarinorman
19 Jan 2017
Re: Update beware,although people may not read both sides, some will, and reading what might go wrong lets every person have more information if they wish to invest more or downsize their investment.Today I read Share Prophets and I think it gives some unknown information that most share holders should read.
ajacko
19 Jan 2017
Update A reasonable looking update on underlying businesses apart from Hubio, which will not return positive cash flow until 2018. Mentions returning shareholder value whether by continuing to grow the businesses or via disposal.
eagle51
23 Dec 2016
Re: Todays `ordinary trades`... thru til... Yes Roger - they don't leave a lot of doubt what ASIC's after. Might work out well for holders here - certainly hope so.Seasons greetings to all and here's wishing you a prosperous new yeareagle
Roger Baron
23 Dec 2016
Re: Todays `ordinary trades`... thru til... Strong words in that ASIC doc, Eagle!
Topalov
23 Dec 2016
Re: Todays `ordinary trades`... thru til `af... It's clearly the fault of city spivs ruining what was a great British business.
eagle51
23 Dec 2016
Re: Todays `ordinary trades`... thru til `af... weblogic - I was 'animated' (livid) in my last few posts, after buying into WTG's: "there's nothing in SGH's claims, all along. It then emerged the independent barrister didn't agree and said SGH's claims against the whole £50m (plus another £3m WTG has already taken from the escrow) were: "more likely to succeed than not" based on whatever he'd seen. This was all he was allowed to conclude according to earlier info provided, but it was translated by WTG into: "a warranty claim presented by Slater and Gordon Limited and/or Slater and Gordon (UK) 1 Ltd (together "SGH"
has on balance a prospect of success and .... if successful, such claim would be likely to have a value of £53m".It might not have been just the £50m in escrow either, because the S&P agreement allowed for up to £100m of claims to be be brought against WTG in whatever circumstances were envisaged in the agreement. As I have become thoroughly fed up with what I see as disingenuous behaviour on a rampant scale by directors of listed companies, as they continue to empty company bank accounts via fat and underserved remuneration packages while they fail to deliver what they're paid to do, the language used in this case was enough to convince me to sell. Why did WTG not just state the facts and say what they intended to do about it? Maybe the problem lay with the barrister? I felt we had been left completely in the dark and with a potential £100m claim hanging over WTG for goodness knows how long, I could not see the prospect of having anything other than a very uncertain ride for some time to come - particularly since it looks as if Mukerjee's efforts so far haven't led to a reduction in cash burn in the businesses being prepared for sale, based on most recent information provided about group cash balances.It hardly inspires confidence that Goldman Sachs has recently joined the list of shareholders (what is a bank of their size doing taking a stake in a tiddler like WTG unless it can see easy pickings or is part of a plan to gain at shareholders' expense?). GS's low moral behaviour is the stuff of legends and its greed is insatiable. Deutsche Bank, GS and Beach Point now hold over 25% of the issued shares between them. You can bet your bottom dollar they aren't there for your benefit.I make no recommendations - I only speak as as I find and without the £1 dividend (which I had increasingly come to regard as unlikely to materialise whatever the escrow result) I see WTG as too big a risk, even for me. Maybe I'm wrong, but there were better places for my money as I saw things.There could be a clue to it all in yesterday's ASX announcement. Doesn't look too good for SGH imv. Might even have spoiled AG's Christmas. I had a decent sized holding as a recovery play, but sold all bar 30k shares a few weeks ago - SGH is as close to tipping point as I've ever seen any company. Huge gearing and no prospect of raising capital with the share price at next to nothing. My suspicion is that the company has used constant acquisitions (a la Terry) to mask weak underlying profits , while they were reported as strong and the directors talked up the share price. AG could do no wrong (where have we seen that before?). There's a possibility AG will end up much like RT - totally discredited and in danger of loss of his liberty, never mind the rest of his money. Unbooked profits in acquired WIP in law firms that were not created by SGH are thought by some to have been delivered and claimed as Grech's brilliance in the year following each acquisition. If this was the case, the PSD opportunity must have seemed like manna from heaven for AG and others in on the scam (which is what some experienced Aussie commentators have suggested it is - I have no opinion on the matter). Such accounting practices are like 'ponzis' - they catch up with the perpetrators in the end. The acquisition of PSD would have allowed a host of sins elsewhere to be swept into one big bin and
weblogic
22 Dec 2016
Todays `ordinary trades`... thru til `after 5pm.... As taken from iii listing.. with some trades listed `after hours`.Not that this is unusual in the markets..Latest trades Time Price Volume Value17
8:38 192.096 7,785 14,955 176:13 195 86 168 16:56:17 195 971 1,893 16:56:17 195 460 897 16:51:35 194.18163 380 738 16:35:28 195 2,036 3,970 16:29:57 195 84 164 16:29:52 195 88 172 16:29:44 195 44 86 16:29:38 195 119 232 16:29:37 195 1 2 16:29:37 195 213 415 16:29:37 192 750 1,440 16:29:37 192 1,750 3,360 16:29:36 195 12 23 16:29:32 195 1 2 16:29:32 192 172 330 16:29:32 192 131 252 16:29:32 192 125 240 16:29:32 192 998 1,916 16:29:32 192 3,859 7,409 16:29:21 192 3 6 15:322 192 3 6 15:16:22 188.08 181 340 15:11:37 192 2 4 14:56:24 191.75 4 8 14:31:21 192 16 31 14:28:47 188 1,021 1,919 13:46:45 192 2 4 13:33:17 190.4381 25 48 11:28:13 188 45 85 11:28:11 188 200 376 10:56:35 186 38 71 10:53:55 189.8499 78 148 09:565 191.5 16 31 09:565 186.5 85 159 09:28:59 191.5 3 6 09:287 191.5 8 15 09:285 191.5 8 15 099:58 191.5 65 124 08:38:57 186 44 82 080:45 189.3499 660 1,250 Eagle has given his views on this joker... some bods with `top reputations` could be milking the cow... who knows.. Certainly the finances don't look great just now..Will the management find some formula to drive this in a more positive direction...maybe do some `deals`.?The board have all been fully incentivised to `deliver`... and even produce some turnaround.. We await the next set of numbers to see if the cash flows can improve or to hear if anything further is planned to drive this forward..
shovelier
15 Dec 2016
Re: Market value =cash in bank I'm no expert but isn't this company now effectively a cash shell waiting for a suitable reverse takeover?The business is clearly going nowhere and the sooner someone takes over the listing the better. Maybe that's why there is activity in the background with people increasing their holdings.
ajacko
14 Dec 2016
Do they know something? I see that Beach Capital increased holding to over 12% and Goldman Sachs to over 6%, do they know something or are they just taking a punt?
