The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Who is Ben Turney I wonder?
Fsa won't do anything. Needs a share holder action group and ben turney. I wonder which share holders remained on the books at the time of delisting.
Interesting taxi , If ever this would or could happen it would be a uk action in court as nyo delisted on tsx two months before , by terms of notice It's a Aim traded company only with uk terms and law !!!
My understanding is that THE FSA are already looking at this and the allegations made in the TOM WINIFRITH newsletters. If they find evidence of wrong doing then legal action from shareholders could ensue The question is whether such an action against the company would have to be mounted in Australia or the UK will be dealt with at the appropriate time, but could complicate matters. The company's parlous state is another. Pursuing directors is not always possible and PETERHOUSE Capital will doubtless defend its position.
I am coming to terms here. From what I can see the new Nomad said no. PH said no as well. So their rape of the company is not going to occur. Court costs money and there is no winners. We are where we are because the BOD were pinning the hopes of the company on getting a RTO via PH. PH did not get their way at the EGM so they gave us the bird. We are where we are because there is no money. NYO is still an Aussie company and still subject to Aussie laws. The majority of the BOD acted in the interest of PH and not the shareholders whom they were obliged to do. The course of action is via complaining to ASIC in Australia. They are toothless tigers but in this case a serious breach of shareholder's trust has occurred and a clear breach of responsibility. Rather than go looking for a court case which will cost money, that money would be better spent saving the company and getting a project. There are parties looking at salvaging the company and there are projects. So rather than finding shareholders that will put money up for a court case, you are better served by finding shareholders prepared to stump up some cash to save the company. So who will stump up some cash? I will.
Can we take phouse to court? Someone needs to contact Ben Turny so we can have a NYO shareholders action group
•
Just the excuse i reckon truth is they knew it would not paas a ahareholder vote
I hope you all are happy now that the company has been delisted and happy to see people lose money. I believe some of this bloggers work for the money sucking demon.
From the RNS does it sounds like the nomad revise decision was speculation @16/17th - was TWs article was one of the causes? I cannot access the article. Anyone know what it was all about?
Got out after the suspension over Bigdish at a loss, lost on waiting for the final spike but hey ho. Joke of a setup, we all got screwed over. RIP NYO
Comiserations to all those invested. From the rns, it's referring to specious market comment, now anyone know who they're referring to? Sometimes best to back the bod when the company are against it, and need every support that they can get. Critiquing the bod at this time when they need you the most, helps no one, and can deter potential 'saviours' from stepping in... as seems to be the case here..gla
What a royal fcuk this has been. Ousted the board with such determination anyone would think they had a plan.
COME BACK RICHARD CHASE, All is forgiven..lol. Lost 8k here
No consolation I know, but even though I bailed weeks ago I still lost £21K. I won't forget either that that clown Lord Byron mocked me for bailing and advised me to re buy. Genuinely sorry for those that got burnt here, a bag of worms, AIM at its worst.
Lost £4,000.
Yep that it nothing left ... crazy really as a new cash shell om Aim would be worth lots more than the actual share price guess the bod fuxked up again .. amazing .
Well, technically not as they "are now taking advice about the solvency of the Company". But I don't think that anyone seriously thinks that any money will make its way back to shareholders.
"However, speculative and specious market comment about the Company over the weekend of the 16/17 September led to the prospective Nomad revising its estimate of the time that it required to complete its due diligence". Interesting. I understand that TW's mob were having a go at the weekend. Is that the 'specious market comment' they are referring to? Anyway, it looks like the game is over on this one.
Well said knee
Judging by your language tone I would rather stop engaging for other BB contributors might not notice the difference. I usually do not want to engage people who are allergic to different views. GLA
The present suspension/delisted is a direct result of not having an appointed NOMAD. NYO announced it was a cash shell months ago so only has 6 months from that date to do a RTO or it gets delisted. The clock is ticking. The BOD should always be accountable for their actions and inactions. I hope they are paying you well for your blind faith in them.
I am glad you are privy to the ongoings i.e extension of time to sort out the deal and the need of a RTO. So why should we subject the BoD to other pressures. Let's remain listed first and deal with other issues later. IMHO of course. GLA
call an EGM had a reply from JMK hes what he reckons we need 5percent shareholders can always call an egm. this needs 5% or more to call it. the letter to BOD needs to detail the resolutions to be put to the EGM. That takes time to arrange and should have been done as soon as PH deal was made public. It would still be possible to call an EGM now of course but would it achieve anything? No RNS from NYO on what is happening seems to be annoying lots of shareholders. NYO may already be de-listed; we just don't know! IF that is the case a EGM request is essential to get rid of the BOD and then we either wind up the company or try to re-list with a business in it in a few months. There is some gossip that AIM has agreed a 6 week delay for PH/NYO to sort out their deal. If this is true it gives shareholders time to call an EGM. However it may stop the PH dilution but an RTO is needed very quickly because of the RTO deadline from AIM.
Why would you support the current BoD? They have done nothing to help existing shareholders. They do not even update shareholders.