UK 12:06 Sunday, 4 October 2026
Breaking news and expert analysis on fast-moving AIM and LSE listed shares
Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from ShareProphets). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
Quindell (QPP) bulls have today celebrated the news that chief fraudster Robert Terry and sidekicks Laurence Moorse and Steve Scott have bought 1.575 million Quenron shares at c123p. However they rather miss the point that the trio have not actually risked a cent of their own cash. This is the latest smokescreen and is such a curious transaction it only makes the sell case even stronger. Within the stock puffed up to 133p on the back of this nonsense it is another chance for the bears.
Already a member? Sign in
• All premium articles
• Tom Winnifrith’s Bearcast
• Access to all the entire nearly 13 year archive
• ShareProphets Daily Newsletter
Cancel any time
This area of the ShareProphets.com site is for independent financial commentary. These blogs are provided by independent authors via a common carrier platform and do not represent the opinions of ShareProphets.com. ShareProphets.com does not monitor, approve, endorse or exert editorial control over these articles and does not therefore accept responsibility for or make any warranties in connection with or recommend that you or any third party rely on such information. The information available at ShareProphets.com is for your general information and use and is not intended to address your particular requirements. In particular, the information does not constitute any form of advice or recommendation by ShareProphets.com and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any investment decisions.
Comments
Rob
What a bizarre transaction this is. He’s is hardly going to go hungry if the shares tank / he is arrested etc. Skin in the game? Give me a break.
Great update on the RNS.
Tinvest
So, RT did not put any of his personal wealth into the business to attain the shares he has put up as collateral?
ADVFNPrep
“And in order to ensure a cash free spoof trade for pals Larry and Steve it is Terry who is providing 90% of the collateral for loans of which only 60% have so far gone to him.”
This struck me as unusual as well.
I also noticed that “Includes shares held as family interests by virtue of position as beneficiary or potential beneficiaries of certain trusts or companies. “ applied to the purchase by Steve Scott.
turbograndad
My thoughts exactly when I just read RNS, wondered what spurious piece of nonsense, in a long line of spurious nonsense, will just go the same way as the other director purchases. Obviously though they still think that this still impresses, but only the impressionable, but theres still quite a few out there, eeeaww, eeeaww.
Dominic Cooper
Do we know for certain what the underlying transaction is? Could this in fact be some sort of short hedge, dressed up as a collateral secured loan? Based on the well-trodden path that was followed at TIG, it is about time for Terry to short his own stock, is it not?
Richard
Great idea by RT and the others to put them in a position to increase their holdings in QPP at will with an incredible amount of resources to fight back at the people trying to bring this british company down. TW you should be ashamed at yourself for the position you continue to take.
Tom Winnifrith
Dick
My positon is that I have demonstrated 100% that Rob Terry & QPP have committed accounting & securities fraud & for that I have received death threats, abuse and worse. I am very proud of what I have done. You lie in bed with fraudsters. I doubt you are a knave but you are a fool.
T
Scott Sanderson
They wanted to buy £2m worth of shares so fair enough they don’t have that cash available right now, considering it will be locked in for some time.
They are putting up their 52m shares which they have already PAID for – today worth £70m odd – up as security so it’s all or nothing.
If they only bought £200k worth there would be complaints of why didn’t they buy substantial amounts. Bears not happy today
alcira16247
Tom
Great analysis to what must be one of the strangest transactions, ever, even for the likes of Mr Terry & Co!
A multi-millionaire borrowing money, secured with his own companies shares to buy more shares in his company…
Have I got that right? Isn’t that truly bizarre?
As you state, Tom, not one penny risked and am I right in assuming Equities First Holdings LLC, will be making a pretty hefty interest charge on their loan, too? At what rate, as I further presume they are sub prime lenders?
If I or any sort of ordinary person wanted to borrow funds, wouldn’t we poodle off down to our local high street bank?
I think Dominic Cooper has called this right…. the whole thing is extremely fishy and in my humble opinion well worth you getting your mega investigative skills to work, Tom, in unravelling what’s exactly going on!
Rob
Richard – The point about QPP being a British Company gets spouted by mug shareholders regularly. Does that in some way make the frauds more understandable, a little acceptable, and we should be more tolerant and maybe ‘cut them some slack’?
Tom should be ashamed? I believe he should feel the polar opposite.
Richard T
I’m with Dominic on this.
Say it’s a ‘Loan’ which means RT ‘buys’ the shares and delivers them via a Legal Mortgage plus a whole lot more shares immediately to the Lender who sells them in the marketplace and realises the cash which it ‘holds’ on a bare trust for RT’s behalf less the loan. The total shares sold is less than 3% so doesn’t need to be disclosed by the Lender as they are the Legal owner of the shares not RT.
So the net cash effect on the Lender is 0 but RT has sold a tranche of shares which otherwise if he were seen as directly selling would cause the marketplace to crash?
When the shares are worthless, the Lender takes the cash from his loan and delivers the balance which it was holding as a bare trustee. All through some Cayman’s Island company that there’s no chance of being able to trace who is the owner?
So RT is seen to be ‘buying’ shares while an ‘unknown’ holder sells a large chunk more and BBMs say ‘..more fool the seller..’.
I don’t know enough about the law and loans / mortgages involving title but I do remember the idea ?of a Legal Mortgage? where the title of the property involved was transferred by the mortgagee; but on redemption he was entitled to have the title transferred back and therefore at all times retained the ‘beneficial’ ownership which is sufficient for disclosure purposes. Thus RT would remain the registered holder with ‘no knowledge’ that the Lender had sold the shares. He wouldn’t have to disclose the sale.
The only obligation on the Lender is to deliver the shares up on the redemption of the loan. But if RT never asks the Lender to allow him to redeem the loan, the Lender never has to deliver the shares…..A sort of Employee Benefit Trust in reverse.
Just a thought.
SEAGREEN2
Tom if you gave a more balanced view people would respect your rather continual ya boh sucks I am right everyone else is wrong approach. .
If you bother to go and investigate http://equitiesfirst.com/ you will see it is a well established source of global alternative finance and that the company would not have agreed the loan (which attracts a market rate of interest circa 5%) without doing some serious due diligence.
I am not disputing that when QPP was at £6.00 it may well have been over valued, but I do not believe this is necessarily a Northern Rock 2 or indeed a Tenon 2 situation or you have the financial due diligence to support such an accusation that the shares will go to zero.
I am not saying they wont but rather than fire from the hip some balanced consideration should be given to why an established firm would lend the Directors such a large sum of money.
After all no one accused you of fraud or in competence when Rivington Street was mismanaged and its funds continued to invest in worthless aim resources stocks such as VGM and the firm went from a high of circa £1 to less than a penny and is now in receivership. costing a lot of investors personal hardship.
Perhaps a little less of the Tom the “noisy cheerleader” and a bit more Tom the “well researched commentator” would earn the respect you so clearly crave,
.
Tom Winnifrith
Sea
Au contraire quote a lot of folks accused me of all sorts of stuff at RSH. Re VGM as it went to 1p or whatever almost 3 years after I left the fund it is not really all my call is it. The gold fund i managed was above its launch price when i left it. I have admitted many times that mistakes were made at RSH. Read a bit more of my stuff and you will see that I have done a lot of humility.
But on QPP I have shown that it has committed securities and accounting fraud and lied t investors. I have proved that with fact. So why the fuck show balance. That Hitler killed 6 million Jews but on the other hand? Be serious a company that is a fraud needs to be called a fraud and unlike critics of me I have the proof that I am right
You are mistaken if you think I write in search of popularity or respect from Bulletin Board buffoons. I write for my pleasure. Those who I respect say they respect what I do but that is a bonus. TT
Ash
Looks like Equity First (the lenders) have been accused of being naughty boys in the past with shares held as collateral against a loan such as this and given that the loan of £1.8m is typically 70% of the agreed value of the collateral they might be well advised to try the same thing again.
https://cases.justia.com/delaware/superior-court/107290-0.pdf
Lee Cruxton
Could it not just simply be that he and his fellow directors do not have the wealth available on tap to purchase some £20m or so shares needed to effectively stamp out the shorters, hence the borrowing? Seems pretty straight forward to me
gateway
Heehee – is there just, perhaps, a very small part of you Tom that thinks that maybe, just maybe, you are beginning to lose the argument here?
Today’s RNS was staggeringly good news for QPP holders, yet you’ve very cleverly still managed to put a negative slant on it…for that I salute you. But most of us know that actually what you’ve written is spun bullshit and RT and his cohorts have just demonstrated an enormous show of faith in their company.
They may be right, you may be right (though I doubt it), but it’s definitely ‘game on’ and they ain’t going down without a huge fight. Be very interesting to watch.
alcira16247
Tom
So Equities First Holdings, Indianapolis, United States loans monies to Mr Terry & Co using QPP shares as collateral over the two year term of the loan.
Interestingly, Equites state they will loan up to 70% to value for securities based loans….. the value of equities can be as low as $5 per share….. that’s, what £3.10 ish? As we know, Quindell haven’t traded at that level for months, so seems to be a reasonable assumption that First Equities haven’t advanced anything like 70% loan to value. A truer figure, is anyone’s guess, but hell, Quindell is hardly a AAA bet!
Also, I would guess, Equities First, given the risks involved would be asking for a lot more than their normal 3.5%- 4% interest charge to give them some extra comfort on this transaction!
In fact, wouldn’t surprise me, given the controversy involved with dealing the Directors of Quindell that they had to put the whole sum of 59 million shares up as collateral to secure the £1.8 million!
Just a thought! But, anyway way you choose to cut it, whole thing stinks of desperation!
Sweet Karolina
Wow that is a lot of collateral to have to put up for a loan of that size, yes there may be more to draw down but not that much more. Equity First clearly do not believe the shares are undervalued in fact it would suggest they are way over valued. I wonder what terms are written into the loan to cover the eventuality that the shares are not trading in 2 years
Saint Allard
I sold mine a while ago just after the RAC deal went bad. I’d rather pile in if things start to turn the corner than watch my cash erode. But what of the institutional shareholders? Surely Fidelity wouldn’t sit idly by and watch their clients funds dwindle at the hands of someone you say is a fraudster, would they?
easyman
I dont see any evidence/proof its running out of cash. Q3 cash resources were flat.
Q4 cash flows must be almost in the bag, either collected or invoiced for…very little accrued income in there – if any.
If the ship is going down then whats the rationale for todays move?
james
Investors using beat-up stock for cheap loans
Unregulated market demands due diligence, one lender warns
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20081026/REG/310279985/investors-using-beat-up-stock-for-cheap-loans
snippet
Then a banking friend told Dr. Zelinsky about a stock loan program offered through Chicago Bancorp. Under the program, run by Equities First Holdings LLC of Indianapolis, she received a three-year loan for 80% of the value of her stocks, with a 3.5% interest rate. Nowhere else could she get a loan so cheaply, Dr. Zelinsky said. “And the nicest part of it is that in three years, I will have a windfall” if the stocks have appreciated when the term ends, she said. If her stocks tank, Dr. Zelinsky has the right to keep the loan and walk away from the stock without owing the lender a dime.
Paul Scott
This is indeed an utterly bizarre transaction, which is open to various interpretations.
The way I see it, QPP Directors are clearly desperate to prop up the whole wobbly structure, because it needs to raise cash. So they have to get the share price up, by whatever means they can. Pledging their existing shares as collateral for loans to buy more shares is the poker equivalent of going all-in. They’ve got nothing to lose – if the company collapses, then their existing shares are worthless anyway, so pledging them as collateral for a loan to buy more shares, might impress some people, and keep the plates spinning long enough to get another fundraising away, possibly? If it doesn’t work, then the shares are still just going to zero, which if you have pledged existing shares as security, means the whole lot is written off. Providing there are no PGs, then the Directors can walk away from the wreckage unscathed.
This latest bizarre transaction fits the same mould as all Quindell’s activities, and to me seems a very clear indication that Directors are now desperate to prolong the fantasy here before it all inevitably comes crashing down. I’ve increased my short position as a result of this deal today – it’s a major sell signal in my view to see Directors this desperate to prop up the failing share price. I remain of the view that Quindell will collapse in H1 of 2015.
F
Tom,
keep up the good work! people really do need to think “is this real…?” i am in the industry and EVERYONE is talking about them, the wheels MUST be about to come off??
their comments on ID conversion are ludicrous, less than 10% of those cases will settle IF that, and that is before QLS is intervened and the files are dished out to all and sundry to run them off
The only people making money out of Quindell are the shorters and the top boys milking the gravy train for all that it is worth… CHOO CHOO!!
mark
Tom,
The only thing you have demonstrated 100% is your opinion. This is your right. You have given no proof of anything. The 3 directors have put everything they have so far invested on the line, taking out a loan facility to enable them to store plenty of ammunition to throw out at the shorters should they need it. And all legally without using a penny of company funds. Company funds that will be held back until such time as it is appropriate for these to be used for share buybacks and dividends. Further ammo against this shorting campaign. We have heard much from you as regard your claims of fraud and wrongdoing. No balanced professional journalism from you at all. In fact, childish name calling and foul language is your calling card. This is the beginning of the end of this short campaign. I wish you a happy retirement in Greece when that fat brown envelope lands on your doormat.
Tom Gilbert
“The Purchasing Directors are each required to redeem the transferred shares at maturity when the loan is repaid”.
As with so many things to do with Quindell, this simply doesn’t make any sense. For starters, it reads like someone other than the Purchasing Directors is going to repay the loan, otherwise they would have used the more normal wording “when they repay the loan”. If you have transferred shares to someone else, you can’t redeem them.
With no comment about the extent of the facility, we have no idea what discount the facility providers have put on the value of the shares, but I’d bet a pound to a penny it’s very substantial. Reminds me of the final death throes of Maxwell Communication Corporation.
Scott Sanderson
Wow so many conspiracy theories!
Bottom line is 1.575m shares are off the market, which can’t be sold as they’re held by the lender and will only be transferred to the directors when they’ve paid the loan back in 2 yrs time.
Their security of 52m shares at todays SP equates to £70m so plenty of collateral there for further purchases.
Bears were saying “if directors believe the company is so good why aren’t they filling their pockets”.
Well you got what you asked for ;-)
Neil
Never heard of such behaviour on a director share purchase. It’s got to be a sell signal.
2+2=4
Two previous transactions with Equities First on Investigate -http://www.investegate.co.uk/Index.aspx?searchtype=1&words=Equities+first
One in October also involving 3 Directors of IQE and one in January involving 1 Director of Igas Energy
Canaccord are referenced in all 3 announcements
Very curious
CPPH
Been have a wrestle with the loons on LSE this eve. My god it’s torturous. I know I shouldn’t but I just want to test if any of them had the slightest clue or concern about this transaction. Needless to say it’s all fine and dandy in their eyes. If the shares are transferred to EFH will we soon see reduction in holdings RNS’s for Terry? Then we might get an idea of the LTV.
alcira16247
Scott Sanderson
Your living in cloud cuckoo land if you think there is anyway, Equities First have given a line of credit of £70 million for 52 million shares in Quindell! In my opinion Mr Terry & Co have had to give their entire holding just to get the £1.8 million.
Given that Equities First will loan up to 70% on value of shares as low as $5 (£3.10), Quindell had been trading at cira £1.30 for the last week, so would it be fair to assume (generously) they have only advanced 35%, equating to some £17 million approx?
But then again, assuming Equities First have performed due diligence and know this company are deep in the mire and heading towards the wall, embroiled in allegations of fraud and malpractice are they really going to be advancing out such a large sum (£17 million)…..very very much doubt it!
And why in the first place would you be using such a firm and not normal lending sources?
I think Paul Scott has hit the nail on the head, but can’t wait to hear what further observations Tom Winnifrith has on this very strange transaction, too.
easyman
Some acrobatic interpretations of todays director BUYS.
Why not the simple? cash is flooding in, shares look cheap?
Whats the alternate interpretations == trying to boost the SP == like trying to boost moral on sinking ship== makes no sense, PR activity would do nothing as directors existing shares now collateral and cant be sold.
Dare I suggest the bear case is starting to look more complicated than QPP accounts?
Scott Sanderson
Look folks, those 3 directors shares are valued at ** £70m** so just ask yourself why aren’t they SELLING them. You honestly believe they’re happy to put £70m on the line if they believed they were going bust!! Surely they’d want to pocket some cash before the company folds?!
The bears are sounding as delusional as some bulls in the past – just ask yourself why are they going ALL IN?
Also key wording in RNS “initial significant purchases of stock”…. now the collaterals on the line expect more of these purchases.
If RT only bought 100k shares the bears would say why such a small amount if he really believes in the company. This shows how much they believe in the company
SEAGREEN2
Tom
Thank you for your response and sorry for raking over old history..sticking to QPP you state in your reponse
“But on QPP I have shown that it has committed securities and accounting fraud and lied t investors. I have proved that with fact.”
This is simply a lie if you had proven these fact kpmg would have resigned and prosecutions of the Directors would follow….
I have no idea whether you are right or wrong but again this is an example of you not telling the truth is to date you have not proven anything
best Sea
Lonster
Scott Sanderson
Those shares are valued at £70M but for how long? If they sold them the share price could well collapse as it would show that the directors are not confident about the prospects of Quindell. They have already pocketed cash from salaries, perks and expenses no doubt.
We are not commenting on the amount of shares that they have purchased but the mechanism they have used to make that purchase. They are not spending a pound from their own pocket to purchase these shares but instead using existing shares (which could prove to be worthless in 1 year) as collateral.
Seagreen2
I don’t think you can say that TW is lying. He has provided evidence and facts to show, in his opinion, that securities and accounting fraud has taken place.
Do you think that by TW providing this evidence and facts that KPMG would just resign? Do you think they would say ‘ok, TW has a point so let’s resign from this one’? There is a legal and regulatory proces and if that proces is to be played out then we might just see KMPG resign and prosecutions made in due course.
Right now it’s too soon but I hope the proces is in motion if fraud has been carried out.