We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey 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.
TheSwan101: "Pageant are just underwriting it but it does not mean that they will take it all, Alan mentioned that shareholders can participate as well (in the Zak interview below)".
Thanks for the link Swan, but on listening to it I think you're misinterpreting it. Linn was encouraging existing warrant holders to dive in and take their shares. That would be the holders of the 130 million 3p warrants still outstanding from last year. Given where the share price is right now, it seems unlikely to me that very many would be taking him up on the offer.
Bullseye, Pageant are just underwriting it but it does not mean that they will take it all, Alan mentioned that shareholders can participate as well (in the Zak interview below). Why give equity to SpotOn when they have not delivered and the company can just do this themselves. Proving that they can deliver is the biggest question yes but the noises seem to be good.
https://www.share-talk.com/alan-s-linn-chief-executive-officer-providence-resources-pvr-l-interview/#gs.zedxa8
Pagent will get almost 20% of the company in stocks and warrents for about 5m Investment. My understanding with this if the company is offering pagent such a lucrative offer why didnt they do with SpotOn, something amiss here. SpotOn consortium would have demanded something more, I doubt existing shareholders will be betteroff.
I think TOR had quite a few opportunities to develop this field, in 2015 there was an offer for 200 million when the total number of shares was at 60m, he didnt accept that offer that was the fab time shareholders would have got back some of the money and field was developed by a strong player. Alas, he took all of us for a ride with all rose tint glasses. The new CEO diluted stocks to disbelief by issues at 1.5p and with stock warrents.
Mamms,Furlong is in so deep he's only trying to protect his investment (if you can call it that)
Anyways Pageant Holding's can just use it as a tax write-off so it's no skin off Furlong's nose..
No one can say this was unexpected. This was another 'Hail Mary' funding scheme, to be closely followed by another. In my experience, you find out pretty quickly the difference between positive support, strong backing and BS when people actually write meaningful cheques. No one has written a meaningful cheque here. From those of you taking comfort from Pageant's 'offer' I suspect Mr. Furling could be in a sunk cost fallacy trap. The environment is too negative, a rebel alliance will never deliver this - only a major weighing in and taking it on is a path to development (and I assume they've all said 'no' already. You'd have to ask whether someone ought to intervene (financial regulator or someone) to stop the charade.
Still, I'm sure the greens are delighted, no need to take hard decisions, just watch it die by itself.