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 and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
Lets put it another way a £10k investment at the Teather offer price 18 months ago i.e. 0.9P would have bought 1.1m shares
A £10k investment this time last year i.e. 0.3p would have bought 3.3m shares
Post dilution and 100 - 1 consolidation and the 1.1m shares become 11,000 x 3p value = £330
30 x bagger required to breakeven.
3.3m shares becomes 33,000 x 3p value £990
10 x bagger to breakeven .
Wrong, wrong, and wrong again funnily enough
Your average was 0.5p (180m) than you added 60m at an average 0.07p and your 17% holding is about to get diluted to less then 3%.
And ...... all thanks to Scott.
"the main reason why you need this to 10 bag just to break even" That's not even remotely close
The finance director is the finance director and will always be the finance director . The failure of this company TWICE and the main reason why you need this to 10 bag just to break even is poor financial management .
He also made and posted the HW video that we now all know "never was"
He was also 100% responsible for the White Car investment failure .
However my personal favourite is this one Aug 20th 2012.
Red Rock has entered into a subscription agreement with YA Global Master SPV, Ltd ("YAGM"), whereby 37,500,000 ordinary shares in the Company ("Shares") were subscribed for at a price of GBP0.02 per Share for a total cash consideration of GBP750,500 ("the Placement").
Separately, YAGM and Red Rock have entered into an equity swap agreement (the "Equity Swap") over a notional 37,500,000 shares in the Company (this does not involve the issue of new Shares). Under the terms of the Equity Swap upon each of six monthly settlement dates the prevailing market price of the Company's Shares, discounted by 10%, will be compared to a benchmark price of GBP0.02 per Share (the "Benchmark Price").
- If the discounted market price exceeds the Benchmark Price then a payment is made to Red Rock by YAGM, with the overall payment depending on the amount by which the discounted market price exceeds the Benchmark Price.
- If the discounted market price is less than the Benchmark Price then Red Rock will owe a payment to YAGM, with the size of such payment depending on the amount by which the discounted market price falls short of the Benchmark Price.
In order to satisfy any such payments under the Equity Swap, Red Rock has deposited GBP625,000 in an escrow account. A portion of the escrowed funds will be released to Red Rock on each monthly settlement date after first, deducting any payments that may be owed to YAGM.
Obviously YAGM shorted the SP down winning the bet and losing shareholders £250k and all Scotts idea.
The question is why was Casino Scott betting large amounts of shareholders money in the first place?
Scott isn't 100% responsible for anything.
You was blaming AB 100% for a decade, now he's gone, ya projecting it all onto Scott.
Yup, he's been involved in it all, but we all know AB was by far the main protagonist.
Why hasn't Scott Kaintz stepped down and apologised to shareholders for being completely and utterly useless?
I understand Stephens argument about looking to the future and leaving the past behind , but that doesnt work if the person that is 100% responsible for the complete downfall and collapse of this company TWICE.. retains his position as financial director.
If anything its extremely dangerous for shareholders for him to still be here.
3 billion shares for £830k
0.5 billion shares to RRR (£145K)
2.6 billion shares (locked in for a period )
1 billion £280k
TTotal 7.1 BILLION new shares of which 2.6 billion are locked in for a period ,leaving 4.5 billion that can be sold at profit provided the SP remains above £0.000275.
Thats a lot of shares , 3 times the present amount of shares in issue to be precise with a further 2.6 billion to be added over the next 12 months.
If you take the JP loan option into account that adds a further 2.6 billion shares to the equation ,meaning in order to clear debts and to get back to zero again this present incarnation needed to issue an eye watering 11,200,000,000 shares,3 times more than the incarnation before .
Dalai Lama of AIM needs to learn from Scotts child like mistakes.Including a mass dilution thats it about to happen over at RRR next week that will be the 5th time Scott has gambled large amounts of borrowed money at high interest rates and successfully managed to lose every penny of it .
Um. We will blame the online calculator. Manually it's just under 30%.
PS. Will that person who keeps reporting my posts please report a few more. Because i like to keep to under 25 posts a month. So if you can get 5 posts removed that means mid week i'll be able to make 5 extra posts. Thanks.
No they won't own over 30% combined
When the lock off comes off and the price is below 2.75p (post 100-1 share consolidation price) you'll see that i wasn't wrong.
Also a correction to my earlier post. When YA and Riverfort receive 2,596,363,636 shares they will just own over 30% (combined) of RGM's shares.
This past year i've been trying to keep my posts to under 25 posts a month. So don't bother replying.
I'll graciously accept your apology for wrongfully suggesting that YA/RF will have cheaper shares than anyone else.
It's funny how you mention who owns what but you only say "P notes converted = £715k".
LOL you should be more proud and shout from the rooftops that YA and Riverfort will soon be owning almost 30% of RGM shares. :)
So... RGM had circa £1.9m debt in total..
P notes converted = £715k
CLN by Lundy & Co converted = £280k
RRR converted = £145k
P notes retired to 2021 being bought by JP = £290k
CLN by YA/RF retired to 2021 being bought by JP = £440k
CLN to be paid in cash May 2020 = £30k
Calculator is your friend
Yes Stephen i can see it says the shares are locked in but for those "promissory conversion shares" it doesn't specify a price like it says for the others. So you would think they agreed to be locked in because they know they won't lose out if the share price falls below 0.0275p (or 2.75p after 100-1 consolidation).
All shares converted/ issued in this deal are the same price, 0.0275p
YA/RF shares locked in, various stages
100% for 3 month
70% for a further 6 month
40% for a further 6 month
because he seemed to be suggesting that James Parson's C4 Energy had took over the entire RGM debt that was owed to YA & Riverfort. But in the RNS those additional 2,596,363,636 Promissory conversion shares were given to YA and Riverfort. The RNS says:
"The holders of the Promissory Note (the "Promissory Note"), first announced on 6 June 2018, and most recently updated on 22 July 2019, have agreed to extinguish the entire remaining balance, owed under the Promissory Note, through a subscription for new loan notes and a share conversion.
The partial conversion of the Promissory Note (the "Promissory Conversion Shares") will result in the issuance of 2,596,363,636 new ordinary shares of the Company, and the investors have agreed to lock up the Promissory Conversion Shares, 100% of the total for three months, 70% of the total shares for a subsequent six months, and 40% of the total shares of the Promissory Conversion Shares for a further six-month period.
The above two paragraphs doesn't mention who was given those 2,596,363,636 promissory conversion shares but skip near the bottom of the RNS and it says:
"Riverfort Global Capital Limited and YA II PN Ltd, the participants in the Promissory Conversion, jointly held 19.93% in the past twelve months, and as such are deemed substantial shareholders during the last twelve months"
So come the end of December those 2,596,363,636 promissory conversion shares will mean that YA and Riverfort will own around 14% each (or a combined 28%) of the RGM shares.
This is not surprising because it was YA and Riverfort who originally loaned RGM the $1.6 million loan in June 2018 (for the disastrous US coal project) and because RGM have missed numerous repayments YA and Riverfort have added hundreds of thousands onto that debt through restructuring fees, extension fees + interest.
So to sum up C4 energy have taken over £729,000 of the YA and Riverfort RGM debt but RGM owed YA and Riverfort much more than that. So RGM have also paid YA and Riverfort the remaining debt by giving them 2,596,363,636 promissory conversion shares. Because it doesn't mention at what price those shares were given it most likely means YA and Riverfort will be protected if the share price falls below 0.0275p, or 2.75p after 100-1 share consolidation.