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.
Either you weren't there or you got shy! But I asked (on your behalf) about the options. Incentive to retain the 2 key members of staff until the end game! Agreed last year when the package was a 50% premium to share price but couldn't be announced as the bod were in a closed period. The options were over seen by the NOMAD (who was at the meeting) everything above board!!! Filter button time.....
Spud, anyone on the bench outside with a red hat and a bottle of Echo Falls in a brown bag? Mumbling to himself about warrants. :)
Only messin' Mitch.
See my earlier post Si ;))
Sorry just realised you were replying to my earlier post
Hope you feel better soon, Mitch.
Regards, Si
Allenby is infa NOMAD
"A NOMAD is a corporate finance advisor, usually a boutique investment bank, which conducts thorough due diligence for the suitability of an AIM applicant for the exchange. The NOMAD, if satisfied with the company's business model, financial and operating track record, competence of executives and directors and intended capital structure, will assist the company in its preparation and application for admission to AIM. If the company and NOMAD are successful in their efforts, the NOMAD will continue to monitor its client — the LSE requires it. The NOMAD must act as the regulator, ensuring that the company complies with AIM rules at all times. The NOMAD also serves an ongoing role of providing advice on business operational or financial strategy."
Every regulatory aspect of the buisness goes through them for approval.
They even monitor directors tweets!!
Get well soon Mitch
Mitch NOMAD is a Nominated advisor. Every company on AIM adheres to a stringent set of rules and policies and MUST have a NOMAD in place. Without one the company’s shares are subsequently suspended and delisted. I’d have assumed you knew this given your challenges on the laws of something’s most see as immaterial.
The directors have been given some share options which will benefit them if the share price rises.
Of course they know more than anyone else about the potential for the share price to rise - they run the company.
Absolutely standard practice.
I'm glad you didn't raise it at the AGM - you would have looked foolish.
I gather from some posts the vessel shouting the loudest is empty , a lesson in Nomads , seriously LMAO !
I find it very concerning that we have individuals investing their hard earned cash on the stock market in particular the aim market when they do not even know the basic principles. To not know what the NOMAD does is quite astounding and shows a distinct lack of knowledge and understanding of market rules and regulatory frameworks involved.
I am however sure there are many instances of this, maybe there ought to be an introductory test brought in before allowing private individuals to invest on the market to demonstrate they at least have some minor understanding of what they are getting involved with, for their protection.
As for INFA as our captain tweets, onwards and upwards.
Mr T
An invested interest in company getting through this critical period and you report them to the FCA for legal and transparent actions ..hardly helping
Rads, his query will fall on deaf ears. The point he raised isn’t even qualified as an issue. If he wishes to waste his time complaining be my guest is what I’d say. As indicated below, to question the legality of a situation when he doesn’t even understand the basic principles of governance and advisories that a company and its staff must adhere to is a little idiotic.
I'm not sure about reporting it to the FCA, but I think it's right to question options. Especially when the amount of essentially, "free shares" is the amount he already holds in the company. I think people need to keep it in perspective where we are. No funding, no offtake agreements, no FID. I know these are all "progressing". But the CEO hasn't delivered yet. But he has made sure he is compensated for trying regardless of the outcome.
He hasn't Doesn't get a thing if he leaves before the year It's to retain key staff , if anyone had bothered to go to AGM they would have heard the explanation
The options align the BOD's interests with the shareholders interests so that raising the share price is the best thing for everyone - it amazes me that people moan about such a positive thing.
Not really a hardship for him I'm sure. I don't know his salary but it will be good. Plus at the current share price it's worth £150K a year bonus. And if it hits 1.5p share its £175K a year. My point is it isn't contingent on any deal apart from the share price for a proportion of the shares. I'm not against it unless they deliver. If they don't, then it's just another AIM CEO ripping off shareholders. Which is why I think he should've waited until the deal was complete before granting very generous options.
I know people think this is all part of the deal. But realistically, would they say otherwise?