Monday, 6 June 2016

Crowdcube's version of 88 Delicious - served with a twist of irony.

We found this posted on the Crowdcube blog - 

88 Delicious Brands Limited

At Crowdcube transparency and honesty with our investor community is of the utmost importance to us; we therefore wanted to provide an update regarding a business that attempted to raise finance on Crowdcube in 2013.
88 Delicious Brands Limited sought to raise finance on Crowdcube in August 2013 however, after information posted in an update on the pitch page did not pass our required due diligence standards, the pitch was removed by Crowdcube and no funds were taken via the Crowdcube platform. We understand that Alan Colton Jr., the founder of 88 Delicious, subsequently made direct contact, off the platform, with Crowdcube members who had expressed interest in the pitch. Unfortunately we understand that some of those people invested in the business outside of Crowdcube’s regulated environment.
In a recent court case we understand that Alan Colton Jr. pleaded guilty on two counts of fraud relating to misrepresentations made to investors in the 88 Delicious pitch update and in subsequent direct communications with investors. A sentence has not yet been handed down and pending this it would not be appropriate to make further statements on the matter.
We would however like to reassure our members that Crowdcube’s processes and practices in relation to this matter have never been questioned by our regulator and do not form part of the police investigations.
In light of this incident and as part of our ongoing commitment to investor protection, we have thoroughly reviewed our processes and have taken additional steps to safeguard our members against such activity. This includes the introduction of an improved investor relations portal as the recommended channel of communication between investors and entrepreneurs on platform and prominent risk warnings in relevant communications about the risks of investing outside a regulated platform. We hope that these measures will help to prevent a similar incident from happening again.
This version seems to ignore a few facts - 
1. 88 Delicious's fraudulent documents were initially passed by the Crowdcube out to lunch department.
2. When investors were informed by Crowdcube that despite completing the campaign, 88 Delicious funding would not be completed, they didnt tell them why. That is why Alan Colton was able to get away with telling these investors some cock and ball story about Crowdcube making a mess of the paperwork - the sort of story they were only too likely to believe.
3. Why when this matter has been blogged about here for months, has it taken Crowdcube so long to comment on it and where oh where is the apology?
It's very clear that honesty and transparency are seldom topics discussed at Crowdcube meetings, unless the topic is about avoidance of responsibility. It's time they stopped fire fighting and either closed up shop or got their act together.
We will have more on this, so keep your eyes open! 


  1. "After information posted in an update on the pitch page did not pass our required due diligence standards, the pitch was removed by Crowdcube"

    I think what they are trying to do is defer there matter to the 'forum and update section' which is 'unregulated' by the platform and therefore voids them of any wrong doing. It is true that Alan posted a lot of tripe onto that section - HOWEVER, I can say with 100% conviction that they posted a fraudulent document relating to weather spoons onto the 'pitch details' section which is up to their amazing due diligence department and they are liable to this under FCA regulations. Police aren't investigating them because no body has brought charges to the platform. It is important that they do know that it hasn't gone unnoticed by the investors - they might be able to fool the world, but what does it matter when their investors know?

  2. The police are looking into CC themselves? I'm a 88 investor so happy to see him get done for fraud although expecting a slap on the wrist sentence.

    Can't believe CC hasn't issued an apology.

  3. Michael, it requires investors to make the claim against the platform - they've dodged a bullet it seems as they say the police aren't investigating. I personally believe that there is a claim based on the evidence. I have the investor list from Alan somewhere - crowd litigation anyone?

  4. If the crowd wants to go after CC i'll be happy to help.