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.
CarlThat - exactly the same thing happened to Ascent Resources plc and a unit of Henderson’s (now part of Lombard Odier). The latter kept selling its placed shares and CLNs at every rise for about a year IIRC, aiming for 5-10% profit for every trade.
CarlThat - these fund management companies aren’t some PI gambling this months mortgage payment in the hope of the next ‘bagger’, they are outfits which run lean, risk-adverse operations over multi-million pound holdings. They will be quite happy to take 1-2% profits in order to maintain healthy monthly cash flow targets.
If you doesn’t ‘cut-it’ for you, I’d advise you stay away from investing, but it’s clear you don’t understand how markets work...
@carlthat, I’d say the fund like all of us, has limited resources, they need to make their money work. This fund has a similar operation on the VAL board at present. Liquidity is key to them, so they can offer the same awful terms to other poor desperate companies. Quick turn around and smaller profit, but do it more often and don’t get caught holding.
HotShot69 - but that logic would suggest every stock needs a fund selling to enable a fluid market. This is nonsense. MMs don't just buy shares from funds! They create a market by setting a spread and taking associated risk/reward.
And the demand/supply dynamic works regardless of this, again, a fund holding 10% means there are still 90% (minus Director holdings) in free float. The fewer shares there are in public float means an amplified demand/supply impact.
If I had know they had this amount so far sold off and who knows how many left . Iwould not have not bothered buying in the 1st place
Why are not told the entire figure of warrants and shares they have etc
Why? Well, without their major sells appearing regularly throughout the day from them, where are the MM's going to get the stock to satisfy the buying demand on very good news like today? They would have to induce sales... probably by raising the bid. As stated... supply and demand in a fluid market.
Beamer21 - but there will be supply and demand regardless of who holds the shares, surely? I understand that supply and demand will affect the Ask and Bid that MMs set. But why does it matter if a fund holds 10% or not??
Usually a fund holding a large % of a stock is seen as a good thing, it shows confidence in the company.
I agree with CarlThat, and have asked before, why EHGOS dump their shares at low profit margins if they believed the sp would increase... The only thing I can think of is they want to convert more shares and make more money. But that brings dilution and risk...
Supply and demand
A question for everybody:
Why does it make any difference EHGOS selling/ offloading their shares or holding? How does this make the sp rise? I don't understand the logic here.
How may the fund offloaded today, given that probably a large proportion of the bigger/rounded trades are theirs? Let them sell quickly... and once gone, we can hope for a much more positive rise! GLA.
was responded to like a fart in a small lift
Heavenknow what would have happene of the news was 200K or worse . Its funny how markets always want to take down share by loads .
Complete contrick and this is not even aims for Christ sake
Volume of trades so far today is over 140M - 14% of the total stock.
Funder will be gone sooner rather than later
stock that regardless of its actual ability to generate revenues would have risen very nicely today if it hadn’t been for the remaining overhang - simple as that
Jay_P nothing to do with luck. It’s called researched and reading the RNS and not believing the same nonsense of people saying 1p plus today. But hey, let’s not tar them with the same brush as someone who actually calls it right based on knowledge...let’s just filter and call him a deramper
If the liability are settled or near to settlement then surely off loading the old business becomes easier, wouldn't be surprised if that comes next and the cash used for accusations. A lot going on here, I'm chilled waiting for the next chapter and beginning of iconic labs. .
Lb. Our answer of where did the £1.5 million go ??? The answer came by Rns today. .Ouch.
So £1 million was raised in warrants and Sefton conveys as much. Ouch
Means nadda until contacts land in an RNS, look at bbsn print example
That assumption works both ways Spike!
Anyway, I’m at break even at this level and have cash waiting to buy some more once the ‘funders out’ TR-1 drops.
Just from one contract "Company perspective, an engagement worth in excess of £1 million will bring financial stability. The importance of this cannot be underestimated" the second, third contract ? No matter how you try to be negative financial stability is what they need, these won't be at this level for much longer. Blue afternoon my guess.
LB pure speculation based on very little unless you known their margins before any of us Flat finish on the cards imo
Just re-read the RNS, although positive on the face of it, there is one statement that has probably contributed to the negativity:
"...I know that time and costs of dealing with the significant (and sometimes hidden) liability issues has been trying but we are nearly there, and with the support of our investors, can clearly look forward to an exciting future for the Company..."
What does this mean:
- Significant liability issues
- Hidden liability issues
- With support of investors
Does this mean they underestimated the liabilities?? Are there additional costs identified for stem cell business restructure?? Will there be another Financing Agreement and conversions/ dilution??
I still say the game changer RNS will be the restructuring and disposal of the stem cell business as it is a massive loss leader...
This should go back up sooner rather than later, especially with the expecations of further updates incl. corporate structure as far as I understand.
I wonder how much long left for funds to clear