The B A Peters phoenix?

[Richard10002]

Re: Very sticky mud being slung around here

[ QUOTE ]
The thing that missing from most of these posts (one notable exception ) is a realism of how Ltd companies work and if things go wrong whats best.

Surely the system is working well to give an organisation a clean sheet to start again albeit with assets from the old co sold cheaply? (but still at market price). It ensure people are prepared to be entreprenuarial in addition to creating jobs - or in this case saving a number of jobs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think everybody realises how Limited Companies work and I guess the entrepreneurial thing is perhaps valid, (although, the costs of setting up and running a limited company are generally such that small businesses tend to be self employed individuals).

However, your comment about giving an organisation a clean sheet to start again, (and the assets are either cheap, or market price ... I dont think they can be both), is not actually the idea... it's what often happens, but it's not the idea.

The idea is that personal assets are not at risk... end of story!

As to creating and saving jobs... for every pound the old company was in debt, that is a pound that someone else has lost, (assuming a pennies in the pound payout, which is usual after the costs of administration). I wonder how many small businesses are going to either suffer, go bust, or just close, as a result of what has happened. I wonder how many peoples life savings and dreams will have gone up in smoke.. I wonder if every job saved in the new company is a lost job or liveliehood elsewhere.

There are no winners - except for the people who run the same company without the old debts which, if it happens, (here, or with kitchens, or property, or whatever), is a scandal. Oh! and the administrators - they love people going bankrupt and limited companies going into administration.

 

[Emjaytoo]

Re: Opal Marine Limited not opalmarine ltd

When will you all grow up?

With the exception of a small number of well informed and knowledgeable forumites, most of you are spouting nonsense.

What has happened with the Peters Opal debacle is what happens in our world of commerce. Whether you like it or not, it is the way things work. It is neither illegal, nor is it morale, but it is the way! If you want to play then you have to accept the rules. I well accept that a lot of people play the game without understanding the rules and for them I feel very sorry - but people get run over crossing the road!!

Just sit back, take note, learn, have empathy for those who have lost (maybe their life savings) and accept the fact that you live in a western capitalist society, where these things happen on a regular basis.

You will not change anything - all you can do is learn!

 

[Rob_Webb]

Re: Pack of card lessons for bleeding heart types

Mmmmmm, not sure I followed the gist of this at all.

But sounds like a convoluted pack of excuses for some p!ss poor management.

And sounds like it was all the fault of those awful customers who were unreasonable enough to see a product they liked at a great price and place an order.

Customers obviously had it coming to them. After all they should have been able to see behind the scenes at how those 'poor dears' the management were so overwhelmed by a rush of orders that they.... well.... just couldn't keep up really. Ahhhh.

Quite understandable really. Stupid customers had it coming.

If what you say is true about the boatshow, do you really expect me to feel sympathy for a company that can't keep track of it's orders to the extent that they lose track of who genuinely deserved the boatshow special offer price and who didn't?

For christ sakes get real.

 

[tcm]

So what if the directors/owners are the same?

Let's say you start a company selling winches. A stand at the boat show, excellent gear and you get lots of orders. You place an order with the manufacturer to satisfy those orders. All fine. But the maufacturer doesn't make that exact model any more, and the new ones are new improved matt black but exactly the same part number. The customers all want chrome, of course, as at the show. The supplier wants paying - he's satisfied the order and your delivery crew matched the order with the delivery note, so you took delivery and owe the money. You just can't sell the things. The supplier sues and he'll win easily - you can't een afford to pay yourselves yet let alone a decent solicitor.

Under these circumstances and lots more besides, the directors have no murky fault. They traded honestly. They stopped trading when they could see that further trading would be fraudulent. They need to let this first venture go bang, and find a new manufacturer/supplier - one who will deliver what they say they'll deliver and on the date promised. Perhaps Bavaria is just such a company.

 

[Koeketiene]

What about justice?

My feelings exactly!

Let us not forget that there are people out there who have potentially lost (part of) their life's savings. No doubt they have a huge battle ahead of them to recover something - if anything at all.

On the other hand, there are the people behind Peters Opal who seem to have no problem at all starting over. What are the financial repercussions for them? A shrug of the shoulders? And we should cheer them on? These things just happen - that's life. I don't think so!

Whatever caused Peters Opal to fold - greed, stupidity or a combination of both - these people deserve having mud slung at them. And if some of it sticks, so much the better. It will serve as a warning to others.

 

[Bajansailor]

Re: Opal Marine Limited not opalmarine ltd

"Just sit back, take note, learn, have empathy for those who have lost (maybe their life savings) and accept the fact that you live in a western capitalist society, where these things happen on a regular basis."

Kim, can you honestly say that you would have issued the above statement if you were buying your lovely Bavaria now (eg you might have paid 75% of the purchase price when the Adminstrators were called in)?
You were very lucky that it didnt happen when you were buying your boat.
I think that Guapa has summed it up very succintly above.

 

[Rob_Webb]

Re: So what if the directors/owners are the same?

That's what good management is about. Avoiding getting yourself into these situations. Notably through a combination of having the right contracts and relationships with customers and suppliers to avoid such basic errors arising as your suppliers not being able to supply what your customers have bought, with you caught in the middle.

 

[tcm]

Doh! Contracts and relationships = more cards again

Ooh yes, a nice solid contract, the very thing. Lets all have a copy each and sign it in blood. The boat shop promises utterly and completely that they will deliver the boat working perfectly on the right day honest honest. Except other stuff happens, the freighter sinks, terorists do stuff, heart attacks and so on. So what they honestly and reasonably promised doesn't actually happen, and you can then either call up some lawyers and give them lots of loot, or do something else.

The only sure way to never have a business problem with your business is ...to not start a company. Does this apply to you? What excelent management. Sailing, management, and lots of other things are quite hard, and it is not possible to give a 100% guarantee. Because sometimes there is failure. Get used to it. People oughta stop pretending that good managament or good seamanship means never having a problem.

imho

 

[tcm]

sympathy

You can feel sympathy for anyone you like. That isn't at issue.

What is at issue is whether a company going broke is inevitably a result of bad management. It isn't.

You seem not to be familiar with the basic elemtns of a limited companies. The Directors might or might not own the company. It is entirely possible that they do not own a single share between them. They can perhaps be hired and fired by the owners of the shares, and it all depends on the contracts. People can and do control plenty of companies and not be Director of any of them. The Directors are the fall guys who ultimately stand to go to pris and in any case (as here) get mud slung attem if things go wrong, perhaps deserved perhaps not.

Directors need not even get paid, but it is their solemn duty to act in the best interests of the SHAREHOLDERS. No, not the customers or staff, go check it out.

To answer bajansailor way up, (hi there!) ...No it is not common to have three MD's. But note that there is no requiremnt to have an MD anyway and it is not a legal title as such. It is not as meaningless as "vice president" in the uk, cos the cleaner can be VP, whereas (really) only a Director can be managing director of a limited company. However, er lots of partnerships have managing directors, and there's no limit to the number of Directors, again unless the contracts say it is limited.

People are either Directors or not. Only one person is actualy the leader and if others call that person MD it shows they are indeed leader or perhaps merely chief mug. If the MD introduces himself as MD, then usually (but not always) they are a bit of a tosser - it's like referring to your boat as "My Yacht". The only way to trump a listing as "Managing Director" in Companies House info is to list the Company Secretary as "Vanessa" or "Brenda".

Sepretly, if the process of starting a limited company is made very very hard (and er it costs two quid in uk, not a lot of money at all) then fewer people will do it, make more momney and pay more tax. Like in France and Germany frinstance, and loads of other places.

 

[Rob_Webb]

Re: Doh! Contracts and relationships = more cards again

I didn't say that good management = nil problems. In fact problems often help create better management style and techniques when the appropriate lessons are learned.

Sure, problems are always to be expected. But two powerful mitigating tools are good contracts and good relationships. When you have good relationships (with customers and suppliers) you'll find extra options and possibilities exist when a problem strikes.

I guess the acid test is this. If you were given the chance to invest in the new phoenix business being run by the same managers who managed the pervious company into the ground (for whatever reasons), would you put a major chunk of your savings behind them?

I thought not.

 

[PeterGee]

Where you find one set of bollocks, there is no reason not to add more heh.

 

[Twister_Ken]

"Earlier today Bavaria announced that a new company, Clipper Marine, formed
by three former managing directors at Peters Opal..."

Mmmm.

 

[chrisw6809]

So much ill informed comment on this topic. The demise of Peters was like all businesses going under, they ran out of cash. The business was over manned and suffered the loss of important income streams through the loss of Fairline etc. I bought a new boat from Opal last yaer and was incredibly pleased with the deal and the service. I got well over market value for my boat and therein lies the problem. If they were taking loads of boats in part exchange against order or stock boats, they are not realising the full income until the part exchange boat is sold and we all know that can take months to sell a boat. They will still have to pay the builder as soon as they take title to the new boat however. With the increasingly lavish boats sold by Peters, a few dels like that and they will soon run out of cash.

On the subject of the new company Clipper, who have taken the UK sole distributor franchise for Bavaria Yachts. You can't blame the guys as they would be out of work anyway. They saw an opportunity and took it. You can't blame Bavaria either. Just weeks before the boat show season and one of Europes largest builders faces losing the market. These guys obviously have equity in their relationship with Bavaria or it would not have happened. Good luck to them. It's a new company backed by new money and should be sound as long as they keep their cost base in check.

Finally on the subject of the unfortunate peoplewho are left out of pocket by the Peters debacle. Ever heard of buyer beware? I'm not that well off that I would part with anything other than a small holding deposit and would never part with the final funds until the day I received the boat and good title to it. With this amount of money invovled few extra pounds for a solicitor or escrow agent is well worth it. Surely anyone who is affluent enough to be buying a boat should have this smll degree of common sense. Either that or they can afford to lose the money.

 

[StugeronSteve]

[ QUOTE ]
If they were taking loads of boats in part exchange against order or stock boats, they are not realising the full income until the part exchange boat is sold and we all know that can take months to sell a boat.

[/ QUOTE ] Not sure that this is necessarily the case. IIRC, I was offered a part exchange figure, which was underwritten by a trader, for my previous boat against my current Beneteau, with the boat put on half price brokerage until the money became due on completion. In my case they sold the boat for more than the trade in price and the proceeds were offered to me for keeping until stage payments were due. Had the boat not sold by a fixed date I would have had to pay the stage payments in "cash" and my old boat would have been released to the underwriter for the agreed sum, which would have then formed part of the final payment. The old boat remained mine and in their care as broker throughout.

 

[ladyh]

I find your comments insulting and ridiculous. If as you stated you part exchanged a boat with Peters Opal they either held your money for a short time or put it towards the new boat. In both of these circumstances you would find yourself in the same situation as the people who were brokering their boats when the company went into administration. As I can personally verify that with the majority of them they were awaiting a funds transfer from Peters Opal. In relation to buying a new boat, did you manage to negotiate a contract that appears to be different from everyone elses? We purchased a boat some 2 1/2 years ago and are unfortunately involved in purchasing a boat which is being retained by the Administrator. In both these circumstances the Contract is the same. I.E. requests for stage payments prior to delivery and cleared funds for the balance on the day of hand over. So are you telling everyone that your contract was different from all those who are currently involved in buying boats. If this is the case would you consider letting us have a copy. The whole purchase process was handled correctly by the accounts department as we received receipts for all payments which were referenced to the hull number and contract number. We were just unlucky with the timing of the administation. Hindsight being that wonderful thing we would have held the money in an escrow account, but were assured that our money was in a client account anyway. We are also aware that one of those others involved in this was a solicitor and he had his fingers burned too. We are like all the other people who have lost our life savings in this matter, devastated and distressed.

 

[traveller]

According to Companies House, Opal Marine Limited has a registered address of 112 Hills Road, Cambridge, which is the address of Mills and Reeve, the company in which Mr Tom Pickthorn is a partner. It appears to have been an off the shelf buy which was incorporated 13 June 2007 and the company name was apparently changed from M&R 1050 Limited on the 6 September 2007. OpalMarine Limited with a registered address of Chichester Marina appears to have changed its name on the 7 September 2007 to O M Realisations 1 Ltd and apparently has three directors, Mr A Morgan, Mr F Savage and Mr B Peters.
There does not appear to be anything about Mr Alan English other than someone who appears to run web sites or something. It would probably have been helpful if KPMG were a little more forthcoming about the background of the key personnel in Opal Marine Ltd - they were terribly vague.

 

[Richard10002]

[ QUOTE ]
It would probably have been helpful if KPMG were a little more forthcoming about the background of the key personnel in Opal Marine Ltd - they were terribly vague.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is why there is some suspicion that it will turn out to be the Usual Suspects...... The only reason to keep the world in the dark until there is no choice.

How long does it generally take for the new "real" directors to appear on Companies House web site??

 

[Twister_Ken]

Mr B Peters. Where have I heard that name before?

 

[ladyh]

As listed in the times rich list 'Alan English, 64, developed the Heyford Manor hotel in Northampton, which he sold for £4m in 1989, making a profit of £1.5m. He and his wife, Wendy, 62, now have a £103m stake in Hayley Conference Centres Holdings. The Milton Keynes-based company has eight conference centres.'
'Allegedly' 2 of the previous directors of BA Peters are involved in the new Opal Marine not sure what the link between them and Mr English is!