Companies going bankrupt/into administration

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 07 Feb 2019, 22:34

I have literally only yesterday found out the exact meaning of "A unit of alcohol"

(spoiler: it's 10 ml)

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 07 Feb 2019, 23:37

Well there has to be some benefit to hanging around this site. A bit of trivia knowledge is more then we get some days.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 08 Feb 2019, 09:32

Candy: did you know that one or two glasses of wine daily seriously reduces your chances of giving a shit?

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 08 Feb 2019, 13:16

vtsnowedin wrote:May we now move on to how much whiskey is in a fifth sized bottle and how that came to be a standard?

I haven't had my two units and my chances of giving a shit have seriously been reduced anyway!! What is a fifth size bottle, VT. Our bottles are 75 centilitre or one litre if you're feeling thirsty.

Post by **adam2** » 08 Feb 2019, 14:34

70 centiliter these days rather than 75 centiliter for spirits.

75 was the norm just after metric bottle sizes came in. Changed to 70 shorty afterwards partly as a hidden price rise, but also to complicate comparisons between different size bottles.

Bars normally use 150 centilitre bottles of the popular products. Any fool can see that a 150 centilitre bottle that costs Â£20-99 represents better value than a 75 centiliter bottle for Â£10-89.
However comparing 70 centiliter with 150 centiliter may need a calculator.

Post by **adam2** » 07 Mar 2019, 15:41

L K Bennett, a chain of fashion retailers have gone into administration, according to a financial news website.

41 shops and about 500 staff.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 07 Mar 2019, 16:32

kenneal - lagger wrote: What is a fifth size bottle, VT.

Four fifths 4/5 of a quart or one fifth of a US gallon. It was a standard size from the late nineteenth century and the the metrication of the industry here in 1980. When I came to the drinking age hard liquor came in pints, fifths,or handy half gallon bottles. The bottle of Old No.7 I have in the cupboard is 1.75 liters today. A fifth bottle will hold 757ml so they could just change the label and leave the level a little lower in the neck and not change bottle molds or other machinery.

Post by **adam2** » 09 Mar 2019, 00:15

RenewableCandy wrote:I have literally only yesterday found out the exact meaning of "A unit of alcohol"

(spoiler: it's 10 ml)

Yes, and I think that the government target is 14 units a week, or was that 14 portions a week of fruit and vegetables, with the drinking target being 5 units a day.
Does gin with orange juice count towards the fruit target AND the drink target ?

Post by **adam2** » 09 Mar 2019, 12:32

"London capital and Finance" have bust, owing large sums to many investors.

Some might consider this to be deliberate fraud, unlike say a department store that fails due to on-line competition.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47454328

BritDownUnder · Post by **BritDownUnder** » 09 Mar 2019, 23:04

adam2 wrote:"London capital and Finance" have bust, owing large sums to many investors.

Some might consider this to be deliberate fraud, unlike say a department store that fails due to on-line competition.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47454328

Looks like a case of skimming off money as 'commission'. Or maybe as directors pay.

On of the main rules of investing I have is diversify and put your money in different places. Anyone offering a return of 8% guaranteed these days is definitely a fraudster.

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 10 Mar 2019, 12:16

adam2 wrote:"London capital and Finance" have bust, owing large sums to many investors.

Some might consider this to be deliberate fraud, unlike say a department store that fails due to on-line competition.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47454328

From that article - appropriate name for a Director?

Paul Careless is the majority shareholder of both Surge PLC and RPDigitalServices - the company that powered ISA comparison websites.

This reeks of fraud but will there be any prosecutions?

Post by **adam2** » 10 Mar 2019, 15:37

adam2 wrote:
Interserve now "saved" by a deal done with creditors.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47141828

Looks as though they will be bust within a week, the earlier deal to save them was conditional on shareholders voting to support the deal, this now looks unlikely.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47513850

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 10 Mar 2019, 17:32

FCA on London Capital & Finance

Did LCF need to be authorised?

Firms are required to be authorised by the FCA if they undertake any of the regulated activities listed in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 (the Order). Authorised firms are subject to a set of overarching principles and rules issued by the FCA. These principles and rules have to be followed when an authorised firm is carrying on regulated activities in the UK. The Order excludes certain activities from its scope.

Issuing mini-bonds does not normally involve the carrying on of a regulated activity. Therefore, LCF did not need to be authorised to issue the mini bonds but did need to be authorised to issue the promotion of the mini bonds.

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 15 Mar 2019, 14:31

adam2 wrote:
adam2 wrote:
Interserve now "saved" by a deal done with creditors.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47141828
Looks as though they will be bust within a week, the earlier deal to save them was conditional on shareholders voting to support the deal, this now looks unlikely.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47513850

Update - the share holders have indeed voted to reject the deal - 60% against

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 16 Mar 2019, 20:10

More in depth analysis of the demise of Interserve by Don Quijones

Don Quijones wrote: More importantly, Interserveâ€™s demise lends credence to the notion that Carillionâ€™s collapse last year, rather than being a one-off episode, was in actual fact the swan song of a deeply flawed and dying business model that has made a very small few fabulously rich while saddling future generations with huge amounts of debt for increasingly shoddy public services the private sector is no longer able to provide.

A scathing parliamentary inquiry last year accused successive British governments of using the Public Finance Initiative (PFI) to keep many of its current liabilities off balance sheet, Enron-style, while also awarding well-connected businesses and investors lucrative public work contracts. Even if the government doesnâ€™t enter into any new PFI-type deals, it will end up having to pay private companies almost Â£200 billion, including in interest to lenders, until the 2040s for existing deals, in addition to some Â£110 billion already paid. Thatâ€™s for 700 projects worth around Â£60 billion