Search results

Well, they have been told they will receive interest.

NOPM

So do I, but I think it shows a level of frustration. They won’t get there money back in 6 weeks either. I have wondered whether Wasps are spinning them a line to delay the inevitable because the Impact on the team seems to depend on the timing of the insolvency event. From a quick look at the...

A lot of them have seemed very unconcerned, some recent posters are more worried.

Their forum shows that a Number of them will take some convincing. I have put this elsewhere so apologies for duplication, but recompense for the delay in terms of interest payable ranges from 9 to 20% pa and period to redemption from 2 years down to 6 weeks! High level of distrust.

It’s not supposedly a payment deadline any more. wasps have said they would be unable to pay and so are putting together an alternative proposal. Bondholders would be really pleased if wasps pulled some master stroke though.

Just got this from bondholders forum ”The consent solicitation is a CVA (Company voluntary arrangements) whereby an insolvent company seeks to reach an agreement with its creditors to prevent itslef having to go into liquidation. As we know, it requires 75% of bondholders to agree to any...

As far as I know, there isn’t a CVA yet, and to be honest I don’t know whether that would trump the bonds agreement. If it does, it would make such agreements and offers of security worthless.

Yes

The bondholders are more likely to want to invoke the security on the arena and all wasps companies. There may be little value in the companies, but the arena does have some significant value.

Which bondholders aren’t happy about.

The trustees can call in the security on default, and could have already done that but are holding off for now to see what Wasps can offer on revised terms. I am surprised Premier League Rugby haven’t got involved as Wasps must have broken the regulations about financial probity and stability...

From what I have read, it does seem that the majority of bonds are held by brokers on behalf of their clients. It appears that a number of holders were not made aware of the previous consent solicitation ( which made some of Wasps financial KPIs less onerous) and they are unhappy about it. Of...

The charge over the arena is held by the trustees who are US Bank Trustees Ltd. They will have a responsibility to get the best deal for the bondholders - selling for £1 would damage their reputation.

It’s 75% by value, so to guarantee control without any other support they would need £26.25 million. On the other hand, to guarantee non acceptance would only (!) take £8.8 million.

I don’t think the majority (by value)of bondholders are supporters.

They think they have,

it was in March 2021 that Vaughan said they would be relaying the pitch. At that point they knew about the concerts, the CWG and the football season. Apparently in May 2022 they said they wouldn’t be relaying the pitch - the same month they told bondholders they couldn’t pay them back. This is...

This is an extract from the legal charge against the arena that is used as security for the bondholders. Seems to me that Wasps have failed to comply in several respect In terms of upkeep and the requirements they have as landlords for our lease.

One I think