Cycle clothing brand Vulpine is "insolvent" and enters administration

unconstituted wrote:

Guys, road.cc is an advertising clickbait site for cycling products. 

You won't find any reporters, investigative journalists or pullitzer prize winners here. They put out 'reviews' and rider v motorist culture war youtube videos. That's it. Regurgitate some guide every season.

It has a comments section so some of us can make the day go in a bit faster by calling each other names over petty issues. 

It is what it is. No point asking where the proper journalism is on such and such 

That is a dis-respectful and wholly personal opinion, it smacks of entitlement and a lack of manners to me.

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

If Road.cc was a film, it would be 'faces of death' or 'mondo cane'

Superb references!

I think Unconstituted has got the nail on the head with his earlier post.

Paul J wrote:

Anyone else hitting refresh every other hour or so, waiting for Monday in the USA and for Fixie Girl to get online?

One of two things are going to happen next - she's either genuinely going to make a big reveal, or come up with nothing and make herself look a little foolish. It's 'put up or shut up' time.

Not good to read August Cycles comment that, even now, the stories coming out of Vulpine appear less than honest.

Paul J wrote:

Fixie Girl: The Sunday Times is paywalled. People here may not be familiar with any new details in its article.

Article below... Enjoy

"When it raised more than £1m on crowdfunding platform Crowdcube in October 2015, Vulpine Performance seemed to have the wind behind it. The cycling clothing brand had shot glossy promotional films in Italy and Norway, struck a collaboration with the Olympic gold medallist Sir Chris Hoy and said it was on course to break even.

Less than two years later, it is about to collapse. Two partners from accountancy firm RSM are due to be appointed administrators tomorrow, with the likelihood of losses for about 600 shareholders, including several well-known angel investors. It has prompted one early backer to describe crowdfunding websites as “a ticking timebomb”.

Vulpine was set up by Nick Hussey, a former film maker, in 2010. A keen amateur cyclist, he said he wanted to escape the “snobbery” of the professional sport and create a brand that would appeal to casual riders.

Over the next few years he raised £1.1m in seed funding from backers including Philip Jenks, a founder of the publisher Harriman House, and Simon Hulme, a serial investor in start-ups. Several people who put in money said that Hussey, now 43, was enthusiastic and persuasive.

An investment banker said: “Everyone bought the cycling thing and everyone got that it was a lifestyle brand with a trendy look — you get off the bike and go into the pub.”

However, according to several early backers, Hussey insisted on spending large sums of money on marketing and refused to rein that in when challenged. Vulpine also struggled with retail basics, they said, often ordering large amounts of stock and then being forced to discount it aggressively, eroding the brand’s desirability. There were also some problems with late deliveries from Chinese factories, they added. Hussey said: “I am unable to comment during the administration process.”

Jenks and Hulme resigned from the board in frustration in 2015, followed by several other independent directors. In October 2015, Hussey turned to Crowdcube with the aim of raising £500,000. Although at the time he said it was an opportunity for fans to invest, a source said Hussey had “exhausted” his existing investor base.

Vulpine had announced its deal with Hoy earlier that year, and demand was so strong it raised £1m in a week, with at least one investor putting in £50,000. The fundraising valued it at £5m.

Vulpine burned through the money and failed to hit its sales targets. It remained loss making and tried to raise a further £750,000, at a £7.5m valuation, last month. This time it failed and was forced to call in administrators.

Hulme said: “Vulpine had failed abysmally to deliver what it had promised investors in the first round. To me, crowdfunding looks like a ticking timebomb.”

Crowdcube said it had complied with regulations and that, “whilst the failure of any business is disappointing, equity crowdfunding investments are high-risk and unfortunately not all businesses will provide an exit for shareholders”."

Fixie Girl wrote:

Potential red flags are:

Directors paid excessive salaries when the company cannot afford them.
Taking credit from suppliers where there was no "reasonable prospect" of paying the creditor on time
Deliberately increasing debt

FG

I've been half following this, and what a sorry tale:  misguided products in a very crowded, competitive market and, from what I've read, inept management.   If I were a crowdfunder looking to recoup I wouldn't get my hopes up. Whilst on the face of it the Wrongful Trading criteria seem to have been met,  one of the difficulties the crowdfunders may encounter is that crowdfunding tends to be structured as an equity investment (as opposed to a loan).  The Times article you posted hints at this.   Generally in insolvencies the first to recoup are those with a fixed charge over the company's assets (i.e. secured lenders - probably just stock in this case as they seem to have been outsouring manufacturing); the second are unsecured creditors (if any for a company with these accounts!), and 'equity investors', including non-voting ones (i.e. crowdfunders) wait at the back.... but I wouldn't hold my breath whilst I waited.

Paul J wrote:

What about one secured charged being repaid days before administration? That surely was to evade the rules on administration, debt priority and winding up of companies?

I saw that - the one repaid to the Director's lending company... the security was comprehensive in terms of the stuff it nails down so my guess is that is is more likely to have been repaid to get another secured loan - possibly from HSBC.  As you can see below, the Fixed Charge T&Cs seem incompatible the offer of further security. 

By the way - you'd have to be over a barrel to enter into T&Cs such as this, anyway.  Something the Credit Officers for the Crowdfunder should have picked up easily.  

Here's the charge that was repaid.  I would imagine the new charge mirrors this. If it is then the new lender owns the stock, trademarks, IP, everything.

As continuing security for the payment of the secured liabilities the borrower with full title guarantee:. (A) charges to the lender by way of legal mortgage all freehold or leasehold property owned by the borrower at the date of this deed;. (B) charges to the lender by way of equitable mortgage its interest in any freehold or leasehold property acquired by the borrower after the date of this deed;. (C) charges to the lender by way of fixed charge its interest in:. (I) all existing and future fittings, plant, equipment, machinery, tools, vehicles, furniture and other tangible movable property;. (Ii) any investment;. (Iii) its existing and future goodwill and uncalled capital;. (Iv) the debts and all existing and future cash at bank;. (V) any intellectual property;. (Vi) any money now or at any time after the date of this deed standing to the credit of any designated account; and. (Vii) to the extent not otherwise subject to any fixed security in favour of the lender:. (A) any existing and future proceeds of any insurance of any charged property; and. (B) any sum now or at any time after the date of this deed received by the borrower as a result of any order of the court under sections 213, 214, 238, 239 or 244 of the insolvency act 1986;. (d) assigns to the lender by way of fixed charge its interest in and the benefit of all agreements for the supply of goods or services by the borrower entered into on or before the date of this deed and the benefit of any guarantee or security for the performance of any of such agreements or other documents provided that if any such agreement, other document, guarantee or security is expressed to be non-assignable then the borrower charges to the lender by way of fixed charge its interest in and the benefit of it.
Contains fixed charge.
Contains floating charge.
Floating charge covers all the property or undertaking of the company.
Contains negative pledge.

Miggers wrote:

A thorough piece of journalism over at Bikebiz...

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/what-the-hell-happened-at-vulpine/021275

Quality. But... that's Carlton Reid for you. Old school honesty and commitment. Love the guy.

VeloPeo wrote:

Much as it appears he's been pretty unethical, and much as I don't like the bloke, posting up his home address details is a bit out of order 

It's all in the public record. It's not like anyone has doxxed him.

Plus Nick was never shy of publicity before.

TrekAndy wrote:

If you look through the accounts and registered addresses and the sales history of Mr.Husseys house it would appear he has transferred/sold the house to his Mrs. That way they cant lose it can they................

I've been reliably informed that neither Nick nor his wife own the property in question. 

gva wrote:

Are any shareholders planning to come together to find out what is actually happened and if there are options for recourse?

I understand the @lairdelmski on Twitter is raising a posse. He is well connected in the City of London and the press.

FG

Kadinkski wrote:

I invested in the low 5 figures, but I knew it was a gamble and was prepared to lose it - I assume it's gone but its no big deal to me. Ony an idiot would have invested anything they couldn't afford to lose in that proposition - it was a hot mess, but a beautiful idea.

Nick is a really engaging chap and is passionate about cycling - I invested in him rather than the numbers. I wish him well in the future. Nothing but love from me.

Kadinkski wrote:

I haven't really been following this thread because it's a bit dumb, but looking at the last few posts, it does make me chuckle. A promised salacious revelation that amounts to zero on an anynomous internet forum. Salaries (yeah, like £10k a month is anything special for a CEO...WTF-LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!). And house prices now. So many DMIs (Daily Mail Idiots) on this site these days. 

Lets burn Nick's house down unless we get our £179 back....cos there's nothing better to put our energy into .

So you invested over £10,000 in this business, and having read about how badly the finances were and how poorly it was managed, you've still got nothing for love?

I hope for your sake you make some better investment decisions in future

Spacer wrote:

Turns out that people running businesses are after your money and don’t always tell the truth. Who knew?

Some of my favourite quotes from this thread:

“I had issues with a Hoy Fortress Jersey pockets. The bartack stitching was becoming loose”

“If they had sorted out the boob issue years ago, perhaps it would have made a difference?”

“The last business moves seem shady and lacking in morals.”

“I feel a bit mis led if im honest as not at any given time were there any warnings of this”

“Sadly someone beat me to my reveal on Monday.”

“Wow, taking over £9k per month in the last 4 months?”

“His many absurd mistakes include: 1) Telling investors everything was rosy when it wasn’t”

“The previous pitch in 2015 1) No mention of the Hoy brand being finite”

“I notice that the pop up adverts on this page are now for insolvency practitioners - not your usual cycling bling!”

“If you look through the accounts and registered addresses and the sales history of Mr.Husseys house it would appear he has transferred/sold the house to his Mrs.”

 

Have you all got together for the special school’s outing?

Brilliant. I don't mean to sound glib, but honestly, reading that gives me the exact same slightly depressed feeling I get from reading Daily Mail comment threads.

Gweeds wrote:

I'm puzzled why someone with no financial skin in this game would spend this much time and effort here, and then create a second Twitter account, just because they're 'angry'. 

You haven't lost anything, a company has failed. It happens every day. The full story will no doubt come out in time.

But this is looking like a very personal vendetta.

1. How do you know I havent. Maybe I am a disgruntled ex-employee or spurned lover.. Or maybe its from a misguided sense of justice?

2. I just want to keep this separate from my work - are you 100% transparent on the internet Gweeds? What's your point, the bio and pic are 100% genuine

3. Without people contradicting the narrative that Nick was a poor victim of circumstances 99% of people here would be ignorant of the incompetence that led to hundreds of people losing over £2m. 

4. I only posted facts on here after seeing posts about poor Nick and had to say something.  If it was personal then Tony F would have soon quite rightly 'slapped me down'. 

5. I have not disguised the fact that I have publically disagreed with Nick and his methods in the past on here, F2F and Twitter.

6. Are you suggesting that unless someone is intimately involved with something they cannot have an opinion? So much for free speech in the UK then

7. Yes I am angry, is that a crime? Lots of people have been screwed, a few of my friends among them. If Crowdcube had done their duedil, if the original investors had "allegedly" got their winding up order, if I had said something in Oct 15.

This whole clusterf**k was avoidable.

I am off to the gym and I will take my facts and opinions with me.. 

Jenny aka FG

Polite wrote:

So, apart from feeling very naive as well as a little stupid, I hope someone can gve me a factual not opinion based answer. I sent back a pair of Vulpine jeans last week because they are too wide at the bottom, for my liking. Will I get a refund? If not, will they sed me the jeans back?

Worried of Worthing (closest place that begins with a W!)

Don't worry, flares will come back into fashion.

andybed wrote:

 

I'm currently sitting on a Harrington Jacket that I don't require, as I bought two sizes.

Andy-   what size/ colour are you trying to get rid of?  I might be interested.

gva wrote:

Kadinkski wrote:

I invested in the low 5 figures, but I knew it was a gamble and was prepared to lose it - I assume it's gone but its no big deal to me. Ony an idiot would have invested anything they couldn't afford to lose in that proposition - it was a hot mess, but a beautiful idea.

Nick is a really engaging chap and is passionate about cycling - I invested in him rather than the numbers. I wish him well in the future. Nothing but love from me.

So you have love for someone who:

1) Wrote to investors on 30th of March saying everything is great, asking for more money and then less than a month later putting company into administration?

2) Went to the public to ask for money with a very misleading premise and state of affairs?

3) Engage in nepotism, irresponsible spending (2 custom bikes as presents for him and his wife at cost of £10k+) and drawing down £36,000 in directors fees in the 4 month prior to administration?

Hey, I respect all opinions but a lot of people wouldn't!

I'm a little late to the party so forgive my confusion/bewilderment.

In the FY that Nick borrowed £1.2m and generated sales of £800k the business lost £800k? 

How did that happen? who was in control, it's epic incompetence and the very best. Won't say what I actually think...

Anyone seen the full accounts? 

peted76 wrote:

unconstituted wrote:

Guys, road.cc is an advertising clickbait site for cycling products. 

You won't find any reporters, investigative journalists or pullitzer prize winners here. They put out 'reviews' and rider v motorist culture war youtube videos. That's it. Regurgitate some guide every season.

It has a comments section so some of us can make the day go in a bit faster by calling each other names over petty issues. 

It is what it is. No point asking where the proper journalism is on such and such 

That is a dis-respectful and wholly personal opinion, it smacks of entitlement and a lack of manners to me.

Sorry I hurt your feelings pete. Clearly you have an attachment to this place.

simonmb wrote:

Paul J wrote:

Anyone else hitting refresh every other hour or so, waiting for Monday in the USA and for Fixie Girl to get online?

One of two things are going to happen next - she's either genuinely going to make a big reveal, or come up with nothing and make herself look a little foolish. It's 'put up or shut up' time.

Not good to read August Cycles comment that, even now, the stories coming out of Vulpine appear less than honest.

Simon et al 

There is no smoking gun on the grassy knoll but a catalog of avoidable and repeated mistakes. What were you expecting btw?

Some of what I was going say did get picked up by the Sunday Times and CityAM over the weekend.  It did pull a few punches IMHO but did give you a sense of the personalities at work while staying teh right side of potential libel.

I have much more detail around why I/we walked away from a deal back in 2015 and why I made the same decision more recently. I will post once we know what is happening re the Administrator. The deadline for a buyer was today and AFAIK one hasnt been found. I hope there is a statement from the by the time I get to my office. 

Fixie Girl wrote:

Paul J wrote:

Fixie Girl: The Sunday Times is paywalled. People here may not be familiar with any new details in its article.

Article below... Enjoy

"When it raised more than £1m on crowdfunding platform Crowdcube in October 2015, Vulpine Performance seemed to have the wind behind it. The cycling clothing brand had shot glossy promotional films in Italy and Norway, struck a collaboration with the Olympic gold medallist Sir Chris Hoy and said it was on course to break even.

Less than two years later, it is about to collapse. Two partners from accountancy firm RSM are due to be appointed administrators tomorrow, with the likelihood of losses for about 600 shareholders, including several well-known angel investors. It has prompted one early backer to describe crowdfunding websites as “a ticking timebomb”.

Vulpine was set up by Nick Hussey, a former film maker, in 2010. A keen amateur cyclist, he said he wanted to escape the “snobbery” of the professional sport and create a brand that would appeal to casual riders.

Over the next few years he raised £1.1m in seed funding from backers including Philip Jenks, a founder of the publisher Harriman House, and Simon Hulme, a serial investor in start-ups. Several people who put in money said that Hussey, now 43, was enthusiastic and persuasive.

An investment banker said: “Everyone bought the cycling thing and everyone got that it was a lifestyle brand with a trendy look — you get off the bike and go into the pub.”

However, according to several early backers, Hussey insisted on spending large sums of money on marketing and refused to rein that in when challenged. Vulpine also struggled with retail basics, they said, often ordering large amounts of stock and then being forced to discount it aggressively, eroding the brand’s desirability. There were also some problems with late deliveries from Chinese factories, they added. Hussey said: “I am unable to comment during the administration process.”

Jenks and Hulme resigned from the board in frustration in 2015, followed by several other independent directors. In October 2015, Hussey turned to Crowdcube with the aim of raising £500,000. Although at the time he said it was an opportunity for fans to invest, a source said Hussey had “exhausted” his existing investor base.

Vulpine had announced its deal with Hoy earlier that year, and demand was so strong it raised £1m in a week, with at least one investor putting in £50,000. The fundraising valued it at £5m.

Vulpine burned through the money and failed to hit its sales targets. It remained loss making and tried to raise a further £750,000, at a £7.5m valuation, last month. This time it failed and was forced to call in administrators.

Hulme said: “Vulpine had failed abysmally to deliver what it had promised investors in the first round. To me, crowdfunding looks like a ticking timebomb.”

Crowdcube said it had complied with regulations and that, “whilst the failure of any business is disappointing, equity crowdfunding investments are high-risk and unfortunately not all businesses will provide an exit for shareholders”."

You forgot to mention that the article was 'headed' by a prominent photograph of Sir Chris.......awkward!

Chris Hayes wrote:

Fixie Girl wrote:

Potential red flags are:

Directors paid excessive salaries when the company cannot afford them.
Taking credit from suppliers where there was no "reasonable prospect" of paying the creditor on time
Deliberately increasing debt

FG

I've been half following this, and what a sorry tale:  misguided products in a very crowded, competitive market and, from what I've read, inept management.   If I were a crowdfunder looking to recoup I wouldn't get my hopes up. Whilst on the face of it the Wrongful Trading criteria seem to have been met,  one of the difficulties the crowdfunders may encounter is that crowdfunding tends to be structured as an equity investment (as opposed to a loan).  The Times article you posted hints at this.   Generally in insolvencies the first to recoup are those with a fixed charge over the company's assets (i.e. secured lenders - probably just stock in this case as they seem to have been outsouring manufacturing); the second are unsecured creditors (if any for a company with these accounts!), and 'equity investors', including non-voting ones (i.e. crowdfunders) wait at the back.... but I wouldn't hold my breath whilst I waited.

Agreed, there are 2 charges on HSBC according to companies house. Cannot discover how much for though. Both were taken out this year which starts alarm bells ringing.

The current stock is valued at £250k, imho this is optimistic ESP if the administrator move to liquidate.

Fixie Girl wrote:

TrekAndy wrote:

If you look through the accounts and registered addresses and the sales history of Mr.Husseys house it would appear he has transferred/sold the house to his Mrs. That way they cant lose it can they................

I've been reliably informed that neither Nick nor his wife own the property in question. 

Why would he lose the house anyway?  Vulpine is a limited company - it's he company that's gone bust, not Nick personally. 

olic wrote:

Kadinkski wrote:

I invested in the low 5 figures, but I knew it was a gamble and was prepared to lose it - I assume it's gone but its no big deal to me. Ony an idiot would have invested anything they couldn't afford to lose in that proposition - it was a hot mess, but a beautiful idea.

Nick is a really engaging chap and is passionate about cycling - I invested in him rather than the numbers. I wish him well in the future. Nothing but love from me.

Kadinkski wrote:

I haven't really been following this thread because it's a bit dumb, but looking at the last few posts, it does make me chuckle. A promised salacious revelation that amounts to zero on an anynomous internet forum. Salaries (yeah, like £10k a month is anything special for a CEO...WTF-LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!). And house prices now. So many DMIs (Daily Mail Idiots) on this site these days. 

Lets burn Nick's house down unless we get our £179 back....cos there's nothing better to put our energy into .

 

So you invested over £10,000 in this business, and having read about how badly the finances were and how poorly it was managed, you've still got nothing for love?

 

I hope for your sake you make some better investment decisions in future

I admit I've made some terrible investment decisions. I get overly emotional and get carried away with big ideas and concepts. But two things to note:

1) I genuinely only invest what I can afford to lose. 

2) Some have paid off spectacularly (just to give context - 6 fig invested in Facebook over the months it was trading sub $20 - now worth 7 fig). I sound like a dick saying that but I'm not sure how else to give context.

 I can honestly and truly say i don't give a shit about $13k invested in Vulpine - I took a punt on Nick and it failed. I've moved on. So should you weirdos.

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

Polite wrote:

So, apart from feeling very naive as well as a little stupid, I hope someone can gve me a factual not opinion based answer. I sent back a pair of Vulpine jeans last week because they are too wide at the bottom, for my liking. Will I get a refund? If not, will they sed me the jeans back?

Worried of Worthing (closest place that begins with a W!)

Don't worry, flares will come back into fashion.

They never went out as far as I am concerned but thanks for your concern about my £85!

rjfrussell]</p>

<p>[quote=andybed wrote:

 

I'm currently sitting on a Harrington Jacket that I don't require, as I bought two sizes.

Andy-   what size/ colour are you trying to get rid of?  I might be interested.

It's a Medium size, Lightweight Harrington, in Black.

Let me know if you're interested.

Fixie Girl wrote:

There is no smoking gun on the grassy knoll but a catalog of avoidable and repeated mistakes.

Also known as human error.

I don't have a dog in this fight - I have never purchased anything from Vulpine (although in a strange coincidence I met a bloke last week who was wearing an item of Vulpine attire .... spooky), I wasn't an investor and I don't know any of the individuals involved.

At the risk of stating the obvious, this isn't a story about cycling, it's the same hackneyed tale of capitalism that's been played out for more than a century (at least). Businesses fail, stakeholders - owners, investors, lenders, suppliers, customers - lose money. Equity investing was traditionally a game for grown ups, although incremental deregulation of markets has meant that retail investors can also aspire to be "#stockmarketsuperheroes". In "proper" markets those investors are protected (to a greater or lesser degree, depending on how jaundiced your perspective is) by a regulatory framework that prioritises disclosure and standards of behaviour (that some people still manage to circumvent/disregard). The revolutionary growth of non-traditional investment platforms has unsurprisingly outpaced the evolutionary pace of regulation. CrowdCube is more akin to the betting shop and probably should carry the same warning that "When the fun stops .. stop". As its disclaimer says: "Investing in start-ups and early stage businesses involves risks, including illiquidity, lack of dividends, loss of investment and dilution, and it should be done only as part of a diversified portfolio. Crowdcube is targeted exclusively at investors who are sufficiently sophisticated to understand these risks and make their own investment decisions. You will only be able to invest via Crowdcube once you are registered as sufficiently sophisticated." If you lost money that you invested in Vulpine via CrowdCube and you feel robbed, congratulations, you've just paid to learn that you aren't sufficiently sophisticated to understand the risks and to make your own investment decisions. 

As for suing the directors - good luck with that. Even if liability can be established, the proceeds will be negligible (management won't be worth much) and be swept up by the secured creditors.

Chalk it up to experience and move on.

SimonS wrote:

Why would he lose the house anyway?  Vulpine is a limited company - it's he company that's gone bust, not Nick personally. 

No, but a director may be personally liable to creditors (not, I think, shareholders) if the company was trading while insolvent.  It sounds as though Vulpine may have been technically insolvent for some time. 

surly_by_name wrote:

Fixie Girl wrote:

There is no smoking gun on the grassy knoll but a catalog of avoidable and repeated mistakes.

Also known as human error.

I don't have a dog in this fight - I have never purchased anything from Vulpine (although in a strange coincidence I met a bloke last week who was wearing an item of Vulpine attire .... spooky), I wasn't an investor and I don't know any of the individuals involved.

At the risk of stating the obvious, this isn't a story about cycling, it's the same hackneyed tale of capitalism that's been played out for more than a century (at least). Businesses fail, stakeholders - owners, investors, lenders, suppliers, customers - lose money. Equity investing was traditionally a game for grown ups, although incremental deregulation of markets has meant that retail investors can also aspire to be "#stockmarketsuperheroes". In "proper" markets those investors are protected (to a greater or lesser degree, depending on how jaundiced your perspective is) by a regulatory framework that prioritises disclosure and standards of behaviour (that some people still manage to circumvent/disregard). The revolutionary growth of non-traditional investment platforms has unsurprisingly outpaced the evolutionary pace of regulation. CrowdCube is more akin to the betting shop and probably should carry the same warning that "When the fun stops .. stop". As its disclaimer says: "Investing in start-ups and early stage businesses involves risks, including illiquidity, lack of dividends, loss of investment and dilution, and it should be done only as part of a diversified portfolio. Crowdcube is targeted exclusively at investors who are sufficiently sophisticated to understand these risks and make their own investment decisions. You will only be able to invest via Crowdcube once you are registered as sufficiently sophisticated." If you lost money that you invested in Vulpine via CrowdCube and you feel robbed, congratulations, you've just paid to learn that you aren't sufficiently sophisticated to understand the risks and to make your own investment decisions. 

As for suing the directors - good luck with that. Even if liability can be established, the proceeds will be negligible (management won't be worth much) and be swept up by the secured creditors.

Chalk it up to experience and move on.

 

You make some very good and valid points on investments, CrowdCube and capitalism.

However, I think the outrage on this forum and in general is due to Nick and Crowdcube's outlandish promises, spectacular failure to deliver, nepotism, greed, frankly not being straight with people who backed them with their hard earned cash!

surly_by_name wrote:

As for suing the directors - good luck with that. Even if liability can be established, the proceeds will be negligible (management won't be worth much) and be swept up by the secured creditors.

I wouldn't be so sure - http://www.helix-law.co.uk/blog/22-director-s-liability-on-company-insol...

Whether invesotrs can be deemed as creditors is for somebody in a court to decide I guess.

This is why Directors & Officers insurance exists - so you don't lose your house if the proverbial hits the fan and you're sued.

Rapha Nadal wrote:

surly_by_name wrote:

As for suing the directors - good luck with that. Even if liability can be established, the proceeds will be negligible (management won't be worth much) and be swept up by the secured creditors.

I wouldn't be so sure - http://www.helix-law.co.uk/blog/22-director-s-liability-on-company-insol...

Whether invesotrs can be deemed as creditors is for somebody in a court to decide I guess.

This is why Directors & Officers insurance exists - so you don't lose your house if the proverbial hits the fan and you're sued.

I guess there is a principle here, what has happened just sticks in my throat...

Especially when I reread this from road.cc piece on round two funding...

“Again, we want you to own us. To influence us and to be part of our story. To see it from the inside. I’ve loved having 577 customers and friends as co-owners.

“Like our wares, shares are limited,” he added. “Many lost out last time, as we raised so much faster than expectations. Grab a piece of us while you can.”

Judging by the responses RSM its toast.

There is also a rumour doing the rounds over here already that someone bought himself a $1M home in Dec.. Its still too early for me to confirm..  Perhaps one of you guys could do some digging while the caffeine kicks in here

-