Quinn Insurance in Administration

[supersarsfields]

Anglo did lend money to the Quinn family to support their share price

No it didn't.

It lent moeny to the so-called Maple 10 (and this is what will jail the Seanie & Co) to support the share price.

The Board was unaware that Quinn had built up almost 30% as CFD 'purchases' don't get reported to the Stock Exchange.

They did not lend him money to buy Anglo shares. They did cover his exposure when the shit hit the fan.

They lent him money to allow him to meet the margin calls on the CFDs. Had they not done that the shares would have flooded back onto the market causing a crash in the share price. In doing so SQ would have been made bankrupt on the back of the CFD calls but the assets ( The group, and foreign assets) would have stayed with the Quinn family. Instead Anglo devised the loans and then retrospectively linked them to the group and foreign assests. That is why there are 16 counts of share support not 10. ( Maple ten plus the 5 children of SQ and Patricia)

[deiseach]

The Board was unaware that Quinn had built up almost 30% as CFD 'purchases' don't get reported to the Stock Exchange.

They did not lend him money to buy Anglo shares. They did cover his exposure when the shit hit the fan.

I'm confused. What was Anglo's motivation for loaning Seán Quinn the money?

[Shamrock Shore]

Supersarsfields.

Do you know how much Quinn Group owed Anglo before all this happened.
Do you think the entire Group has no external/bank funding?
Do you not think Sean Quinn going bankrupt personally would have called in these loans and he'd be in the same position that he is now.

And finally are the learned High Court Judges Dublin 4 types that are out to get Quinn? Is our judicial system that corrupt?

[seafoid]

"We are here to support the Quinn family, a family who stands for everything that is good in Irishness and deep family values."


I just broke down in tears reading that. Will they kill Lassie now  ?

[AQMP]

Sorry AQMP

Our posts crossed. Anglo was prob doomed anyway - but that doesn't make an excuse for Quinn. When Anglo became aware it was panic stations but, as I said, the damage was done to Quinn. He was exposed to unknown market men to the tune of over 2 bn. Not to Anglo. The market men had to be paid. Quinn ran to Anglo. Anglo bailed him out.

Hey, I lost 1,500 euro as I was a shareholder. Who do I claim this money back from?

By the looks of Ballyconnell last night...the GAA??

[supersarsfields]

Supersarsfields.

Do you know how much Quinn Group owed Anglo before all this happened.
Do you think the entire Group has no external/bank funding?
Do you not think Sean Quinn going bankrupt personally would have called in these loans and he'd be in the same position that he is now.

And finally are the learned High Court Judges Dublin 4 types that are out to get Quinn? Is our judicial system that corrupt?

I know how much dept Anglo are enforcing. Of course the QG had external funding, the bondholders for a start.
SQ getting made bankrupt would have had no call on the QG and foreign assets as they were listed in the Children's names from 2002.

As for the courts, they have given the Quinn family the legal standing to run the case against the validity of the loans so can't argue with them there. Or do you think they were wrong in doing so?

[orangeman]

Anglo did lend money to the Quinn family to support their share price

No it didn't.

It lent moeny to the so-called Maple 10 (and this is what will jail the Seanie & Co) to support the share price.

The Board was unaware that Quinn had built up almost 30% as CFD 'purchases' don't get reported to the Stock Exchange.

They did not lend him money to buy Anglo shares. They did cover his exposure when the shit hit the fan.

They lent him money to allow him to meet the margin calls on the CFDs. Had they not done that the shares would have flooded back onto the market causing a crash in the share price. In doing so SQ would have been made bankrupt on the back of the CFD calls but the assets ( The group, and foreign assets) would have stayed with the Quinn family. Instead Anglo devised the loans and then retrospectively linked them to the group and foreign assests. That is why there are 16 counts of share support not 10. ( Maple ten plus the 5 children of SQ and Patricia)

I didn't realise that this was why there were 16 charges. Interesting times ahead.

Whilst Sean Quinn is not without fault, Anglo executives and their advisers and solicitors are bound to be in trouble.

Whether this will eventually be any good to Sean Quinn and his former group is hard to know but it seems Quinn is upping the ante as far as the media are concerned and right he is too. No point losing that battle as well.

[LeoMc]

Anglo did lend money to the Quinn family to support their share price

No it didn't.

It lent moeny to the so-called Maple 10 (and this is what will jail the Seanie & Co) to support the share price.

The Board was unaware that Quinn had built up almost 30% as CFD 'purchases' don't get reported to the Stock Exchange.

They did not lend him money to buy Anglo shares. They did cover his exposure when the shit hit the fan.

They lent him money to allow him to meet the margin calls on the CFDs. Had they not done that the shares would have flooded back onto the market causing a crash in the share price. In doing so SQ would have been made bankrupt on the back of the CFD calls but the assets ( The group, and foreign assets) would have stayed with the Quinn family. Instead Anglo devised the loans and then retrospectively linked them to the group and foreign assests. That is why there are 16 counts of share support not 10. ( Maple ten plus the 5 children of SQ and Patricia)

Is this the crux of the case, whether these loans against the wife and Children were valid?

[Hardy]

The Board was unaware that Quinn had built up almost 30% as CFD 'purchases' don't get reported to the Stock Exchange.

They did not lend him money to buy Anglo shares. They did cover his exposure when the shit hit the fan.

I'm confused. What was Anglo's motivation for loaning Seán Quinn the money?

I understand they lent him money to meet the margin calls on his CFDs (i.e. the losses these "bets" were making because the Anglo share price was falling instead of rising as Quinn had bet with the CFDs). If they hadn't done that, Quinn would have been forced to dump his shares in the open market, causing the Anglo share price to collapse.

I'm not sure if that action can be construed as an artificial share support scheme, which is illegal, but it's difficult to see how the loans to the Maple 10 to buy Anglo shares, with only the shares themselves as collateral, can be seen as anything else.

[EC Unique]

Looks like this is far from over. Will make a hell of a film some day..

[supersarsfields]

The Board was unaware that Quinn had built up almost 30% as CFD 'purchases' don't get reported to the Stock Exchange.

They did not lend him money to buy Anglo shares. They did cover his exposure when the shit hit the fan.

I'm confused. What was Anglo's motivation for loaning Seán Quinn the money?

I understand they lent him money to meet the margin calls on his CFDs (i.e. the losses these "bets" were making because the Anglo share price was falling instead of rising as Quinn had bet with the CFDs). If they hadn't done that, Quinn would have been forced to dump his shares in the open market, causing the Anglo share price to collapse.

I'm not sure if that action can be construed as an artificial share support scheme, which is illegal, but it's difficult to see how the loans to the Maple 10 to buy Anglo shares, with only the shares themselves as collateral, can be seen as anything else.

I honestly can't understand how it could be considered anything else Hardy. No doubt Sean Quinn had dropped them in it and for that he'll have to accept whatever comes from that. But they made the decision to lend money to the Quinns to support the CFD calls to stop the share price plumenting. What ever way you square that, It's share support.

[Hardy]

Yes, it's hard to see it any other way.

[seafoid]

The Board was unaware that Quinn had built up almost 30% as CFD 'purchases' don't get reported to the Stock Exchange.

They did not lend him money to buy Anglo shares. They did cover his exposure when the shit hit the fan.

I'm confused. What was Anglo's motivation for loaning Seán Quinn the money?

I understand they lent him money to meet the margin calls on his CFDs (i.e. the losses these "bets" were making because the Anglo share price was falling instead of rising as Quinn had bet with the CFDs). If they hadn't done that, Quinn would have been forced to dump his shares in the open market, causing the Anglo share price to collapse.

I'm not sure if that action can be construed as an artificial share support scheme, which is illegal, but it's difficult to see how the loans to the Maple 10 to buy Anglo shares, with only the shares themselves as collateral, can be seen as anything else.

I honestly can't understand how it could be considered anything else Hardy. No doubt Sean Quinn had dropped them in it and for that he'll have to accept whatever comes from that. But they made the decision to lend money to the Quinns to support the CFD calls to stop the share price plumenting. What ever way you square that, It's share support.

Sars

who do you think should pay for it given that Anglo is bust and the shareholders were wiped out ?

[trileacman]

The Board was unaware that Quinn had built up almost 30% as CFD 'purchases' don't get reported to the Stock Exchange.

They did not lend him money to buy Anglo shares. They did cover his exposure when the shit hit the fan.

I'm confused. What was Anglo's motivation for loaning Seán Quinn the money?

I understand they lent him money to meet the margin calls on his CFDs (i.e. the losses these "bets" were making because the Anglo share price was falling instead of rising as Quinn had bet with the CFDs). If they hadn't done that, Quinn would have been forced to dump his shares in the open market, causing the Anglo share price to collapse.

I'm not sure if that action can be construed as an artificial share support scheme, which is illegal, but it's difficult to see how the loans to the Maple 10 to buy Anglo shares, with only the shares themselves as collateral, can be seen as anything else.

I honestly can't understand how it could be considered anything else Hardy. No doubt Sean Quinn had dropped them in it and for that he'll have to accept whatever comes from that. But they made the decision to lend money to the Quinns to support the CFD calls to stop the share price plumenting. What ever way you square that, It's share support.

Sars

who do you think should pay for it given that Anglo is bust and the shareholders were wiped out ?

I'm not Sarsfield but should it not be those who are legally obliged by the law of the land? And if Quinn was wronged under Irish and European law should he not have the right to appeal it to the courts? Or should Anglo and the IBRC be allowed to make up the rules in their quest to regain the money's lost in the collapse of the Irish banking sector.

[supersarsfields]

As I mentioned earlier on this thread, I believe the majority should be picked up by Anglo. The fact that this now falls back on to taxpayers is unfortunate, but that decision was made by the government. They can't pick and choose their liabilities with regards to the bank guarantee. Nor should any liability to the taxpayers result in an unlawful decision just to save taxpayers money.

Again this is based around my understanding of the ways things have happened, and obviously on whether the courts agree. And I'll openly admit a lot of my information would come from a pro-Quinn bias.