Our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode with QuotedData's Edward Marten 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.
Richlist. Fully agree that any further dilution to shareholders should include certain caveats and based upon the performance of this placing which has lead to significant dilution.
This dilution is not a problem provided the capital is put to good use and we generate sales driving the share price to levels which would demonstrate an equal par at least with sector peers.
Further dilution should be on the proviso that it will take the business a step further and be in relation to manufacturing for sale the solid system which intends to target a different market therefore providing additional value.
The BOD cannot just issue olacing shares willy nilly at the cost of dilution to the very people that own the company and they are accountable to in respect of overall performance
This placing should be transformational so I would expect a dramatic uplift in SP in the short term and to see sales and a pipeline of business which indicates clearly that it was essential.
This should be their last chance. Resolution 2 and 3 provide further opportunity outside of this to keep their wages paid through shareholder contribution and not revenue as a commercial business should be.
McPhy Energy could be another partner
We also expect the raise to support our credentials in future industrial and strategic partnering which could provide the basis for a transformational underpinning of the business today and into the future."
That sounds like things are on the table.
Sorry i have some old fashioned paper shares .i hadn't noticed on the rns about the amount of money raised which seems different to what i read in paper version i was sent
Bananaman, it could mean nothing but, jim Gibson used to work for TK so you would think he still has contacts there.
We are now being asked to vote (my deadline is 13th July) on whether we give authority for the fundraising. Not only whether we agree to their issue, but whether we agree that 16p a share is a fair and reasonable price. This was a 25% discount to the share price on the day prior to the announcement and may be a 50% discount to the broker estimate of value after the share issue. Resolution 1.
We are then asked to give authority to issue of further shares up to a total shares in issue in the 900million range obviously with no information on whether or how these shares could be issued and no further consultation on whether we agree to any price as fair and reasonable. Resolutions 2 and 3.
Communication with shareholders is after all an obligation of the BOD under AIM rules. I don't feel I have enough information on possible sales pipelines, business models and projections to assess whether 16p is a fair and reasonable price and inform my vote. We have missed the AGM presentation this year which is always a valuable insight into 'behind the scenes' of the company. The rules on fundraising are that no prospectus needs to be issued in this case. However, when asking us to vote to authorise disposal of potentially around half the company, surely shareholders should be provided with enough communication/information to feel they are informed enough to vote.
I know that retail investors are not able to access the contents of any brokers note. I understand that institutional investors alone are able to benefit from the analysis, estimates and projections of the broker. However if any information on sales projections of business models is offered by AFC in preparation of a brokers note the AIM rules seem to say (Rule 11 e) that this should remain confidential and that no shares should be traded before this information has been notified. If the first trance of these shares may be admitted for trading as soon as monday it suggests that any factual information provided by AFC contained within the note should be notified to us before the shares start to trade.
We have raised the issue of communication with the BOD in the past when they seemed to not be meeting their obligations under AIM rules. I am getting that feeling again, but this time disposal of half the company is at stake.
Daz, I am well aware of the partnership AFC have with De Nora to develop electrodes. I am referring to the partnership that De Nora have with Thyssen Krupp.
The current 'partnership' with De Nora is not 'strategic as there is no financial interest. It is more a strategic alliance if that !
What I am suggesting is that De Nora and ThyssenKrupp are in the business of creating hydrogen gas through a joint venture. Thyssen are a large business with many large clients.
A strategic partnership between ThyssenKrupp Uhde/De Nora and AFC would provide vary complementary IP to take on large scale projects.
The fund has raised a significant amount for AFC but insignificant for JV like what De Nora and Thyssen have.
De Nora are already partners of AFC, surely everyone knows this already, it’s on the AFC website under ‘partners’.
From the RNS -
The Directors have concluded that proceeding with the Fundraising is the most suitable option available to the Company for raising additional funds through the issue of new Ordinary Shares and that issuing the new Ordinary Shares at a discount is fair and reasonable so far as all existing Shareholders are concerned.
For me personally if it’s De Nora who are making the £30m investment then yes I would agree at a discount is fair and reasonable, if it’s another of ABs mates who approached him after a roadshow then no it’s definitely not fair and reasonable
that would be a 'Strategic Partnering'
Complementary IP
De Nora - Electrodes
THyssenKrupp - alkaline electrolysers
AFC - Alkaline membrane and Fuel cell to covert the hydrogen generated using low cost energy back to energy at high cost peak times.
Using the alkaline based electrolyser it would be nice to realise a deal to include the Alkamem mebrane in the system.
https://www.thyssenkrupp-uhde-chlorine-engineers.com/en/products/water-electrolysis-hydrogen-production
Hoping to hear of some significant new investors next week. Guess we will have to wait and see.
would be nice to have a committment to these 3 companies.
So far AFC have worked with De Nora and Air Products but ThyssenKrupp and De Nora have the partnership for electrolysers.
This partnership seems to now be working with AirProducts.
https://m.marketscreener.com/THYSSENKRUPP-AG-436698/news/thyssenKrupp-Air-Products-and-thyssenkrupp-Sign-Exclusive-Strategic-Cooperation-Agreement-for-Worl-30866377/
The ThyssenKrupp group generated sales of $42bn last year.