George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the 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.
Fair enough. You won't be alone in just wanting the modest amount of cash returned. Although it won't be the board of AMC that you'll be paying going forwards, assuming it plays out as these things usually do - it will be the board of the target company.
Slowly slowly thank you for that information.
I would prefer the AMC Board return the remaining cash so that I can decide what should happen to it rather than paying the well paid part time Board of AMC to spend shareholders money on yet another high risk venture.
I am sure the majority of retail shareholders are of the same opinion but let's see how people respond to the idea of forming a Shareholders Share Action Group!
AGE
From the RNS in September there are clearly commodity RTO's available and AMC appearied to be focusing on this market.
"The board of Amur continues to review a number of reverse takeover opportunities. Geographically, these have been located in Canada, the US, Scandinavia, Spain, Brazil, Peru, Chile, Ghana, Mali, Kenya and Australia. Commodities have included potash, silica, alumina, copper, nickel, gold, silver, metallurgical coking coal, energy fuels substitutes, lime and lithium. A total of 17 opportunities have been considered."
I would have been happy with another mining play of which RY was involved in some way (consultant / on the board).
The fact that RY & the BOD bring nothing to a pharma company says to me that they want a clean break
Provexis (PXS) been Invested in this since 2009 still waiting for it come good
Looks like it's going to be making profit soon
Successes on AIM: Fevertree has done OK. Eurasia Mining did OK until the SMO / war - although that's a little close to the AMC bone. Celadon did well, but it's been a rocky trip so you had to time entry carefully - but don't you always. Rainbow Rare Earths is doing OK.
Pharmas: During the pandemic, Novacyt and Avacta did well. Avacta is an interesting one. They recently placed at 50p, which eroded a lot of the value before that placing. But they're still well above the 20p they held heading into 2020, and the cash from their pandemic work has opened up a fresh pipeline of development. I don't hold, but can see potential there. Tiziana did very well during its days listed in London - it's done much less well since moving across to the Nasdaq, so in some ways shows that an AIM listing is far from being a death sentence.
Anyone have any info on this company
Agneissearner,
Slowlyslowly is not advocating one way or the other, simply explaining an RTO in very understandable terms which many will find very helpful
You would not be cross ramping you would just be providing proof that there good opportunities hence the RTO for a small UK Pharmaceuticals Company is going to be beneficial for AMC Shareholders.
AGE
Slowly slowly thank you for your detailed explanation of the purpose of an RTO.
Would you kindly give me one example of an AIM Company where the Board have created shareholder wealth and also one UK Pharmaceuticals Company that has also managed to create shareholder wealt and that it has not done endless highly dilutive share placings!
AGE
I didn't see your previous message by the way, I was typing my reply. "I'm still waiting" lol. Seriously? You don't get to demand that I answer questions. That's not how forums like these work - I don't owe people answers, information or opinions.
But you wanted an answer to the other half of your question: One example where an AIM board has delivered shareholder value. I can think of many. But I don't cross-ramp.
To answer your question: No, I don't work for AMC or any of their professional advisors. No, I don't actually hold shares in AMC. (I did, but sold before suspension). I have no skin in this game. I just saw people posting having misunderstood the purpose and mechanics of a reverse takeover, and thought I'd explain in case some readers find it helpful.
In essence, it's most similar to an IPO, when a previously unlisted company lists on the London market. In this case, it's a pharmaceutical company that wishes to become public. They do it by merging with an existing company that has no trading operation (Amur, in this case), rather than floating directly. The name will change from Amur to whatever they're called. The board will change from Amur's to the people behind the pharma. The management will be the people running the chemo tech development company.
It is the nature of a reverse takeover that it's frequently into a different sector, because the sector (mineral exporation) that the shell was in becomes irrelevant - AMC don't do that any more. We're just a listed shell, that's it. People who had read up on reverse takeovers before suspension would have known that it's rare for an RTO to be into the same sector as before.
When this is finalised, a prospectus will be issued explaining everything, just like for an IPO. It's then up to AMC shareholders to decide whether to vote in favour of the reverse takeover, or to vote against (hoping to push the company to wind up and return what cash remains to shareholders after costs). I'd just caution, as I said, the fact that AMC is a listed company is worth something. If this merger goes through, the cash AMC holds is still there - it becomes owned by the new company, and AMC shareholders would still own their share of that. If they complete an RTO, the value of the listing gets priced into the deal, so AMC shareholders get to keep that value too. If AMC gets wound up and capital distributed, you lose any value from the fact it was once a listed entity.
Slowly slowly I am waiting for a reply to my questions below?
But going by your LSE nickname it may well take you a while to respond!
AGE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slowlyslowly given me one example of an AIM Company where the Board have created shareholder wealth!
Do you work for AMC's PR firm by any chance?
If you think that Shareholder Share Action Groups cannot achieve much then have a look at the LSE AMC forum and you will see that we managed to get a vote of 33% against the resolution to approve share placings so we blocked the Board as they needed 75%.
AGE
Todays RNS has caught me by surprise. I thought that there would be RTO opportunities, but had expected them to minerals & mining.
Pharma is not something that i understand and I estimate that with my share holding, a 2nd dividend is worth about £100k. I would not put that such an amount into one Pharma and so it will be a no vote from me.
If thats the best they can find, issue the 2nd dividend, wrap up the company and stop this nonsense.
I have nearly 11 million AMC shares so we would be off to a good start in forming a AMC Shareholders Share Action Group!
Any more of you want to join me in forming our Group?
I will administer it by obtaining your contact details and shareholdings so that we know how many shares in total that we can organise to vote against the RTO if we are not satisfied with it.
It takes time to arrange all of this so best to plan well ahead and put a plan of action in place should it be needed!
AGE
I suggest we form a AMC Shareholders Share Action Group and then we all vote against the resolution for an RTO if it is not going to create value for AMC Shareholders.
Just have a look at the Scirocco Energy (SCIR) LSE forum where the Board sold its main asset at a loss of £7.813m it then managed to get shareholders to change direction by going into the Green sector and they loaned £1.578m in total to EAG Ltd that they only owned 50% of it's shares to then buy GGL for £700k with 80k for solicitors costs and £100k for due diligence costs and GGL had negative net assets of £250k so a net liability.
They then sold EAG/GGL fot £702k with £150k of contingent consideration to loose between £725k to £875k depending upon whether they receive the contingent consideration or not.
The largest shareholder has requisitioned a General Meeting to return the remaining cash to shareholders before they squander it but the Chairman has other ideas as he wants shareholders to vote against the resolution to give him more time to do an RTO or invest in the Green sector.
The Chairman of SCIR's record on creating value for shareholders is absolutely appalling!
Would any of you be interested in creating an AMC shareholders share action group and then we can collectively block the RTO if we are not satisfied it?
EAG
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judging by the other shareholder meetings they will easily get it passed. No one cares enough to do anything else. It's not the greatest and it will likely perform very poorly in this market, but it's better than expected. Returning cash would be better, but how do you force them to do it.
I agree 100% with ilovesushi.
The Board were acting in Shareholders best interests then they would have returned the remaining cash to the shareholders.
The RTO is all about the Board's self preservation in order to keep the gravy train going as long as possible.
AGE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When and if you vote no, the board will have no option to wind up the company and return all funds to shareholders. Said funds must now be lower during all this time, slowly being eaten away.
Do shareholders really want to enter pharmaceuticals? They can do now. Why be forced into it? Drug delivery target is years away from monetisation and want a listing for one purpose only. An outlet where they can obtain money, for shares.
VOTE NO. Get cash back instead and invest your own money for yourself. Get rid of this board.
ValRix 31 December 2019 accounts
The departures from the board led to some financial and organisational disruption but we have been able to stabilise the situation. Since the year end,we have completed three share issues in February, April and May 2020, raising an aggregate of approximately£1.4m, before expenses, and concluded a consolidation and subdivision of the issued share capital to permit the raising of capital.
Yes 125 shares for 1 new share!
AGE
Judging by the other shareholder meetings they will easily get it passed. No one cares enough to do anything else. It's not the greatest and it will likely perform very poorly in this market, but it's better than expected. Returning cash would be better, but how do you force them to do it.
Current share price of VAL is 4.20-4.30
RNS below dated 13 January 2023 with placing price at 11.00 p so down 6.80 p or 61.81%
London, UK - ValiRx Plc (AIM: VAL), a life sciences company focusing on early-stage cancer therapeutics and women's health, announces a Placing to raise approximately £1 million (before expenses), through the allotment and issue of 9,090,909 new Shares at the Issue Price of 11 pence per Share (the "Placing"). The Placing was conducted by Turner Pope Investments as sole placing agent for the Company.
6 April 2020
125 for 1 share consolidation!
Seems there is always people telling sh’s what’s best for them.All we need to know is,which of the options would be quickest.We can then take what little is left and do what we want.
MD
AVACT recently did a placing at a huge discount
Slowlyslowly given me one example of an AIM Company where the Board have created shareholder wealth!
Do you work for AMC's PR firm by any chance?
AMC has cash that the Board should have returned to Shareholder rather than gambling it on an RTO with a Pharma.
I suggest you have a look at the share price graphs of ValiRx, Sareum , Hemogenyx.
The Modus Operandi of most AIM Boards is to ensure they are well remunerated, then keep themselves in that job as long as they possibly can, award themselves lots of out of the money executive share options, take big risks with shareholders money, carry out highly dilutive share placings without shareholder pre-emption rights, then carry out a 1 for 100 share consolidation, then keep on placing shares!
AGE
When and if you vote no, the board will have no option to wind up the company and return all funds to shareholders. Said funds must now be lower during all this time, slowly being eaten away.
Do shareholders really want to enter pharmaceuticals? They can do now. Why be forced into it? Drug delivery target is years away from monetisation and want a listing for one purpose only. An outlet where they can obtain money, for shares.
VOTE NO. Get cash back instead and invest your own money for yourself. Get rid of this board.
It's clear lots of posters here don't understand the purpose of an RTO by a cash shell like AMC. This is not the board and management of Kun Manie moving into pharmaceuticals. There is here a listed company. That status is worth something - it costs time and money to get a company through the hoops required to list on the London market. AMC no longer has any trading business (that's what it means to be a shell). But it is still a listed company, so if they can merge with a private company that wants to list, that private company has a cheaper and easier way to list on the markets than going through an IPO themselves. Most of the shares in the resulting company would be owned by the former owners of the other company, because they're the one that is worth something. But the current AMC holders all keep their shares too. The management of the new company would be the management of the pharma, and the board would also pivot. This isn't about Robin and others trying their hand at something different; this is them doing what they said they're do, and try to merge with a private company to allow AMC shareholders to extract the value there is in the fact they own shares in a listed company.