Scancell founder says the company is ready to commercialise novel medicines to counteract cancer. 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.
“There's no room for nicety when we're being robbed blind by AAL“
—
Nor is there any room for threats of violence, pulling anyone’s wife and family into this affair regardless of positions and even death threats!
If anyone thinks any of that is acceptable then one needs to have a real hard look at themselves.
I posted the other day that I would be calling for a change of BOD too!! but I have to say that I wouldn't be surprised if we were to find out that CF is not quite the **** that we all believe right now ?????
No matter! tbh all that is important at the moment is for aal to be kicked into touch !
They have TJ but they also stated the other day in the reply to sharesoc that the recommendation to aal does not stop them following all other avenues !!!
I hope that an offer can be considered other than AAL but have the board not given written and binding assurances that they will back the AAL bid ? .
I hope you're right wwguk!
“So, Scotman, you're still up Frasers arse.“
—
Lmao, perhaps I just have a tad more decorum about me than you have.
----
Decorum - behavior in keeping with good taste and propriety.
Certainly wouldn't say Fraser is acting with any decorum, cosying up to AAL to save is arse/salary/bonus.
There's no room for nicety when we're being robbed blind by AAL
Longtermview24, thanks, yet 28 days from the firm offer.
I still hope that the BoD recommendation was just a tactic arrangement for a backstop (it is actually a good thing that is much better than without, as it has provided some justification on the (world class tier one asset) value of the project as recognised by a major mining company) and so as to push other potential strategy-partners/investors to put forward their proposals/offers. CF has done something similar before by replacing existing arrangement (constructors) with new ones. Both of the BoD chair and CF would have a big loss with the 5.5p offer, and would be much better off with any alternative arrangement keeping the company on market. Therefore, they should have strong motivation to pursue the alternatives whenever possible. The consortium one could be a promising one as it should be supported by the big IIs, as indicated by the second largest shareholder. Through negotiation, the consortium may give up some of their conditions or requests, e.g., on the concession from CB owners or Gina, and work out a kind of win-win arrangement with SM for all the shareholders, CB holders, and other stakeholders.
“ I'm sure Fraser and Scrimshaw don't want their shares to be worthless anymore than we do.”
—
Hence why armed with the information they had, 5.5p was/is the only ‘binding’ alternative.
“So, Scotman, you're still up Frasers arse.“
—
Lmao, perhaps I just have a tad more decorum about me than you have.
Nice to see Jupiter piping up
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-7958615/amp/Sirius-Minerals-investors-urges-company-alternative-rescue-deal-collapses.html
I hope other II's are bending Frasers ear.
And I hope Sharesoc can exert some pressure at the meeting.
Keep emailing IR. The more pressure and the more vote NOs will make the BOD work harder for an alternative. I'm sure Fraser and Scrimshaw don't want their shares to be worthless anymore than we do.
So, Scotman, you're still up Frasers arse. Seems blindingly obvious there is a conflict here. Fraser has ballsed up the financing, but he still has a chance to redeem himself. One way to do so would be to get rid of Staley who always looked like a schoolboy out of his depth rather than a CFO.
Somebody needs to run the company. Fraser would have a chance to make his pitch at an AGM. There would need to be a better alternative, no sense in firing him otherwise. And he did say he wouldn't be sticking around forever.
“are you inferring that Fraser et al are now biased and conflicted as they are guaranteed ongoing employment salary and bonus with AAL and are worried they might be turfed out by sholders if the company continues under its own steam.“
—
I’m not inferring anything of the sort. I’m simply saying I very much doubt they would survive any vote should there be another AGM.
wwguk….I think the 28 days runs from the formal offer submitted on 19 Jan, not the "maybe" offer/bombshell that dropped on 8 Jan (followed quickly by the financial consortium revising their offer on 9 Jan that was first submitted in Dec - can one assume that the 9 Jan offer improved the terms of the Dec offer on the heals of the AAL offer - looks like the consortium are keen but not getting as warm a reception as Frasers AAL Aussie mates. Makes you wonder)
Doesn't make it impossible does it Scotman.
And are you inferring that Fraser et al are now biased and conflicted as they are guaranteed ongoing employment salary and bonus with AAL and are worried they might be turfed out by sholders if the company continues under its own steam. Surely that would be not just morally corrupt but criminal. But I don't disagree that Fraser et al are more interested in feathering their own nest and care less about sholders interests.
at this point would leave the company in a very precarious position in the short term of cash balance going forward is my understanding.
Any consortium offer will include huge dilution as they Will want a majority holding and we will still require funding after the £520 million is spent.
Would this consortium offer provide a cushion to cover any unforeseen circumstances?
What I also believe is that CF would be ousted as CEO & TS as CFO if there is ever another AGM.
Unfortunately most PI’s and now II’s have lost faith.
I Emailed my local MP yesterday no reply yet.
"Steve Davies, manager of the Jupiter UK Growth Fund, said: 'We would like the board to pursue any alternative options, including the consortium of financial investors who submitted a proposal for a £519m funding package earlier in January, within the remaining time available.."
The consortium must have approached big IIs for support, as they seem to know some details that we do not know, e.g., £519m in the revised proposal in January. The consortium's initial proposal was in last December; and they submitted a revised proposal immediately after the AAL intended offer announcement. The consortium has shown its willingness to negotiate and adapt the proposal. Given all the SM board members have signed an irrevocable agreement to vote for the AAL, the SM managers were lack of determination to pursue the alternative proposal (as they claimed so quickly on the 8th of Jan that the alternative is not executable). Hope what they did was to get SM a backstop for them to look for better deals; rather than giving up the possibility to turn the alternative proposal into a better one.
Now only two weeks left (i.e., 28 days from the 8th of Jan) before a vote on the AAL deal.
Hope the indicative proposal could become a formal one in next two weeks (of course only if advanced discussion and negotiation between the consortium and SM), and put on the table together with the AAL one for shareholders to choose from and vote for.
The ideal situation is a combination of AAL and the consortium: a halo strategy partner plus a group of financial investors. Only big IIs could push them into such a direction. PIs as helped by the sharesoc and media may also help keeping pressure on them.
IBAB
as a cash derivative they would have to be declared on the 8.3/8.5 surely
And in UK :-)
theory would explain why Citadel and others have been shorting SXX so much recently .
Keep the wealth in Yorkshire.
Do we no were the interview with mr fraser is taking place this afternoon ?i thought he had gone back to australlia
Got it in one LTV
what would an increased offer be a penny ? two at max ?
I want to see this consortium offer so we can see what input was going to be needed from us and the IIs that's the big question ???
ffc
Do you think they realistically expect to squeeze higher TO offer from AAL?
-----
I hope not Yuri. No sholder wants a TO. We want financing to allow us true LTH's to hold this till production, at which point most, if not all LTH's will recoup their investment and some.
Consurtium
Maybe about time, the offer released now ,no names needed at this moment its not a myth