Utilico Insights - Jacqueline Broers assesses why Vietnam could be the darling of Asia for investors. Watch the full video 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.
imo - investment is not a place for emotions
those who involve emotional part into it - well, let's just not insensitively say don't do very good.
answering on your #2 - my standard protocol for research and comms/conclusions
finding cause and effect, helps with identifying good/bad options (investment checklist)
saved me so many times from wipeouts.
let's just say it's mandatory part of learning curve.
1)Read the modus operandi of Interpath.
2) I wonder why you are posting. To be of assistance(??)
3) If so it is not assisting
4) Read No.2 and look in mirror( ?) Youvare not bringing any comfort with your harsh assessment. Whether any trith or not, it is profoundly insensitive.
Liquidity and asset conversion are standardized metrics used in investment industry.
If you have easily monetizable assets (RedX) then scenarios are normally plausible.
If your assets are hardly convertible into cash (4D) - then outcomes are normally very sad for investors.
These are the financial facts and simply statistics across range of companies.
Expecting unrealistic outlier to somehow magically happen here might be a bit naive.
But who knows, may be someone (or several high profile bidders prepared to compete) is ready to pick their R&D work at high price, chances are not that high though (rainbow chasing).
Well said
No one expects anything at this point, I put it out there to give an example of another pharma that went into administration and came out okay eventually and you're throwing out your opinion like it's fact.
There is evidently a chance that shareholders get something back here. 4d's platform and drug trials have shown a lot of promise but we are where we are due to a combination of bad luck, bad timing and terrible management. Perhaps it would be best to share your opinion in future without trying to make it out to be fact.
Yuri
You only bring darkness. Keep itbinside yourself. Don’t give it to others.
think there is a terd drift from yuri.f over to eua, can you please dam the leak as no one there wants the smell!
For those who expect RedX alike scenario - don't even dream about it (not just because of apples vs oranges), check their pre-suspension financials, quarter before collapse they were sitting predominantly in cash with some receivables, minimum intangibles/goodwill/property/equipment - those illiquid categories were substantially below size of residual equity.
It was very easy job for administrators to take cash from banks and pay all liabilities, collect receivables (wait for maturity as per payment terms), retain their share / fees, cover rents/salaries, distribute rest. It's practically 1:1 conversion of assets.
Assets held by DDDD are highly illiquid (and illiquid part significantly exceeds equity), they will be very lucky to get auction conversion on assets of 1:0.3 or 1:0.25, net running expenses, (rents, salaries, impairments on receivables, interest on debt, admin fees)
I don't see much of a realistic prospects for DDDD admin process to end up with any excess left for shareholders.
I agree Vegas22.
Remember the damp squid from my Avacta days.
Good luck all.
Cal it wasnt HH who brought up Val, not sure why we dont like regulars pointing out other opportunities. Was Redx a ramp, appears useful to us at the mo. As someone else said sit back before next step and no rainbow chasing, some safe bets like MKS, yes of the high street, I'm expecting 50% over the next 12-18mths - a ramp, perhaps or friendly suggestion to research?
HH, I recommend you take a look at Amigo, lol, I'll sort an application for Duncan...soon.
That twat always appears when things are bad, gloating
What a sad horrible individual calamari is
Even worse, he writes:
'The share price has reduced recently due to delays (thank the current climate for that), but the share price has now stabilised'
About a share down nearly 40% in a month and nearly 20% last week. Bad ramp in fact as well as taste.
The company would have been issued a warning notice more than 1 month ago. Warning of povisions within the loan agreement should a default occur.
Members would do well to read the Charge Agreements filed with Companies house. They are very weighty documents. From what I have seen Oxford have charges over the company's Scottish properties, it's patents, trademarks and significantly, Intellectual Property, both current and future.
Considering defaults have happened within less than 1 year of approval, the Executive have serious questions to answer.
Administrators are appointed by the Collateral Agents and will act swiftly as default conditions carry a premium interest rate applied to the loans and arrears. The charges are consolidated on a daily basis.
For anyone trying to gauge timings Its worth looking through Redx 2017 RNSs. Give a good feel for a successful rescue.
Good luck everyone. Tough times
Will the Administrators pick this up immediately, or will it go in the "In Tray" for attention when they have some spare hours available?
Administrators have been appointed because OF want their money back. It will be for the administrators to find a way to do that. DDDD want that to be a way that allows it to continue as a going concern, and will work with administrators in that regard. Hopefully they can - would be interesting to know what other finance solutions DDDD we’re working on. But ultimately, if that can’t be achieved then we’re looking at a sale of assets - ie the IP. If the IP goes, there really is no business I think. We, as shareholders, will just come last on the list of payees out of whatever the IP gets. That could be significant given the extent of the patent holdings, but far less so given it would be a distressed sale. Vultures will be circling…
Biker do yourself a favour and fk yourself end of
Morning all.
DDDD going into administration is governed by various UK statutes; the process is clear and defined. That said, how the major stakeholders react and pursue their aims is often the ‘unknown’. For example, DDDD appear to have called in the administrators. The BoD have a legal obligation to engage either a liquidator, an administrator or the Official Receiver under the Companies Act as soon as it was clear they could not repay creditors. They have chosen the administration route. That suggests they believe there is value to be salvaged as ‘a going concern’. Liquidation would only be used if there is no point in remaining ‘a going concern’. Official Receiver only ever used when there isn’t even enough money in the current account to pay the liquidators base fees (rare).
Administration is the best of bad choices. The real issue now is that the largest creditors can (and often do) veto the chosen administrators and use statutory laws to appoint their own ‘friendly’ administrators, thereby effectively taking control of the process. Administrations will say to this that it doesn’t matter because they must adhere to statutory requirements and create the maximum value for stakeholders. I can speak from experience to say that that is a pile of HS. All administrators are kings in their own fiefdoms once appointed and will do as they please - which boils down to fees; they always choose the route that will create the most fees for them, and having an informal/behind the scenes strategy with the main creditor is a sure way to skew the process in the favour of that creditor and the administrators. However, as shareholders our trump card is a vote on the process. We will get the chance at an EGM to vote on the administrators proposal. But I doubt there will be much left ‘in the pot’ to vote on, once the administrators have had their stone of flesh.
Best everyone writes off the investment, learn from it and move on. Sorry to hear about some being ‘all in’. That’s a real shame; but now a real lesson.
All the best
Intrepid.