note that epsilon have charges held over the company assets (i think all of them?) registered at companies house [as per recent share puppets update]. so if DAN does default/go into administration, even though epsilon's shares would be wiped out, it seems that they would then become the owners of the entire company anyway ...
... so epsilon might actually quite like the idea of company going into administration?
... i don't know what that would mean for RT; perhaps depends what link he has with epsilon?- if any, lol.
Thanks Guesstimation. But with RT holding 9% (?) DAN shares and other big share holders as well, the company may not go into administration otherwise it will nullify their shares as well, and the big players that they are, they must be looking at ways to protect their investments.
What is the value of shares that some of us still hold with Dan? Will they become valid if/when Dan is listed again somewhere and starts trading, and at what value, and therefore still have a worth for as long as Dan as a company exists. Or are they useless as whenever Dan starts trading again they will issue new shares and the old shares will have zero value? Any suggestions/ideas?
putting money into a tiny, micro-cap AIM stock like this is inherently v. risky. very very often the punter will lose. so why should anyone care that much about rich pis who knew that risk but placed a bet on shares anyway? ... only really get much sympathy, & FCA interest, if there was some kind of fraud, dishonesty, etc.
(mind, it might be interesting one day to see what Serious Fraud Office conclude in the end about the various parties involved in the QPP debacle, but it's not public as yet which parties are most under their microscope.)
well, good luck if you decide to pursue such a route.
i'm not sure how much specific there has actually been specifically promised that didn't happen. company saying vague things like it 'expects' , 'will explore options', 'will seek to', 'as soon as possible' etc. leaves enough room for a bus to drive through. that's why they are worded that way, sadly.
Not too sure Spikeyk but may be a few things that the legal experts could find useful.
For instance the company failing to publish its annual report and accounts leading to suspension on October 1 (RNS October 1) RNS October 23 - ".....the Company continues to work on the funding package to allow it to publish its FY 2015 Accounts and resume trading on AIM. The Company is making progress on the funding package and expects to announce its conclusion shortly" - But this never happened RNS December 21 - "The Company will seek to identify a replacement Nomad, however, if no replacement Nomad can be found within the given time frame, the Board will explore options to either join another market, and/or to put in place a matched bargain facility to enable Shareholders to trade." But nothing to date on either another market, or a matched bargain facility. RNS Januay 15 - "However, should the shares of the Company become delisted from AiM the Board will examine alternative mechanism's to facilitate trading in the Company's shares , including a potential future relisting. Full details would be circulated as soon as possible.". However, nothing since January 15 (amost 4 months) on any alternative mechanisms.
A legal experts may find something relevant from the above and other RNSs for a possible litigation on the grounds of the company misleading its share holders by continuously building false hopes.
... if you think there has been some kind of fraud, or misrepresentation, then i guess litigation an option tho' evidential burden can be very tricky. or some other kind of wrong-doing. but legal action not really a viable option if it's just about a company that hasn't actually managed to trade very effectively.
obviously, one of the points about AIM shares is that they tend to carry higher risk than most main market companies, and are subject to fewer regulatory requirements. now that DAN is off AIM, even less requirements on them.
did you have something in particular in mind that you think the company may have been at fault about?
Thanks Spikeyj. For those of us who held shares with Dan until the end have no choice but to wait and see when (if) they get back on trading, but for now the shares have zero value. Is legal action at all an option in such cases?
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.