fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Think it's steadied today
Anyone know what’s happening with the Wasp Bond price today? Anymore drops?
Again, never said that I said the accounts, keep up.
The accounts transaction which the independent accountants assess as falsified was known then.
Your source is ?
Please don't say Coventry Observer
Financial. My favourite subjectShares/Bonds go up and down. They will recover over the next few weeks.
The information on the trading accounts hasn't really changed since they were first published in December.
The £1.1 million confused the issue but it's still there just on a different side of the accounts line.
It’s not wrong until a new sponsor is appointed surely.
If it’s not Land Rover then I’m wrong.
State your source then or nobody can believe you.
What are you on about now?
The source was the accounts yesterday where the auditors used the word "falsified".
Ricoh isn't it?
Exactly. An audit that took place last year and was discussed (and accepted) at the bondholders meeting as an 'accounting irregularity'.
It's all in the wording but both the 'irregularity/falsification' and the figures in the accounts were known in December.
Continues to be Ricoh until next year. Your point ?
Financial. My favourite subject
Yes bonds go up and down in value. Most things to do with financial services do. But normally with something like these bonds the movement is pennies. If something very good happens you might get a 5% rise in a day. A bit of bad news that won't make much difference in the long run might lose you 5% in a day.
For the bonds to lose 2 years worth of interest payments in a day you know there is a major problem. It isn't a problem that will quickly go away.
So you think that it is only something to do with what happened last December? If that is the case the bonds would have fell in value last December.
Wasps now have a major problem. The bond holders have been spooked. Suddenly it has gone from a decent investment to a dodgy investment. And someone from Wasps saying everything is OK won't help. There will need to be firm evidence that everything is OK before they recover. That is unless they went down for no apparent reason. And that certainly doesn't look the case.
Exactly. An audit that took place last year and was discussed (and accepted) at the bondholders meeting as an 'accounting irregularity'.
It's all in the wording but both the 'irregularity/falsification' and the figures in the accounts were known in December.
So why did they not publish the full accounts and Audit reports on time?
In the case of WASPs Finance that was December 31st
The Bond issue was in January and once that was resolved why were they not issued then?
The Group Accounts were due March 31st - another deadline missed
One wonders what stage the Registrar of Companies got to with his chasing to get these released
The point is there has been a different deal since you said it was going to be JLR (based on a domain name purchase)....
Unless of course other deals can keep being done and it still doesn't count as "Not JLR"....
You've only just found out the Ricoh deal has continued ?
It's still on the roof
You've only just found out the Ricoh deal has continued ?
It's still on the roof
So why did they not publish the full accounts and Audit reports on time?
In the case of WASPs Finance that was December 31st
The Bond issue was in January and once that was resolved why were they not issued then?
The Group Accounts were due March 31st - another deadline missed
One wonders what stage the Registrar of Companies got to with his chasing to get these released
No idea other than the technicalities of then having to be re-done , re-audited and re-submitted..
Tell me why you think ?
No idea other than the technicalities of then having to be re-done , re-audited and re-submitted..
Tell me why you think ?
No idea other than the technicalities of then having to be re-done , re-audited and re-submitted..
Well Wasps can't afford to take it down can they?
Hang on - you said "
Exactly. An audit that took place last year and was discussed (and accepted) at the bondholders meeting as an 'accounting irregularity'.
It's all in the wording but both the 'irregularity/falsification' and the figures in the accounts were known in December."
Are you saying the Bond Holders passed a resolution based in information that was not complete and may have needed further amendment after the vote?
Read the second half of the sentence.Buzz word "technicalities" again.
Why don't you tell us why?
No' I'm saying it's the same information.
No idea other than the technicalities of then having to be re-done , re-audited and re-submitted..
Tell me why you think ?
You've only just found out the Ricoh deal has continued ?
It's still on the roof
Who cares?So why did they file late and only after being pursued by Companies House?
Didn't they dismiss the issues at the Ricoh previously as just routine, now they have structural engineers in. That's not routine maintenance.The bonds are secured against the Ricoh Arena, which was recently estimated to be worth £60million, an increase of £12million on the previous valuation. It has now emerged that cracks have been discovered at the stadium, attributed to ‘ground settlement’, but that there will be no disruption to its day-to-day operations while it works with a structural engineer to remedy things.
Who cares?
Or like the Les Reid fan club on here ?
He writes your script and you run with it. Not just this thread.
As I said the only people worrying about it are on here.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?