Member Info for 1GW_

"Free float, as defined by the AIM Rules, is 56.3% of the current issued share capital." http://www.silence-therapeutics.com/investors-media/investor-relations/#StockInformation

...but now collapsed back down again. From 28m US page views for AdKarma segment on 5th April Up to 238m US page views on 5th May Down to just 19m US page views on 4th June.

Following the addition a little while ago of the inscrutable "Ad Unit" segment (which now appears to have 141 sub-segments each with a numeric identifier such as "26487"), today the Quantcast RhythmOne page has added a further 50 or so segments with names such as "RhythmOne Premium,9321,no-skipad-function". I hope they're planning to issue a user guide before long...

That's me in for another chunk at 169p, although it doesn't seem to be showing up on the trades listing. Investor sentiment seems to be on the floor (judging from the comments on this board), the sports direct holding is hanging over the company (seemingly not in a good way) and the TU was pretty depressing reading through it again (uncertain liabilities from a financial product [PPI???], loads of exceptionals, more investment to come in FY17, one division hoping merely to "stabilise" sales and the other "hoping" for significant "medium-term" profit growth). So I'm struggling to see how the actual results can surprise to the downside, although clearly anything is possible. The actual recent sales story on Express Gifts in the TU was positive (growth of 8.5% in the last 9 weeks of the year), so I suppose they could say that that has not been sustained more recently if they wanted to give sentiment another kick. But I'm hoping that with the focus on the 2 divisions and some of the investments now (hopefully) bearing fruit, there's potential for a more positive outlook statement. Failing that, some news on a new executive chairman or corporate action (Sports Direct or otherwise) must be a possibility in the not too distant future.

Big reduction in declared shorts on 31st May according to the FCA spreadsheet, despite no obvious volume on the trade listings and no obvious move in the price. Numeric down to zero from 1.1% previously. Oxford down to 0.69% from 0.79%. It rather begs the question of who was selling to allow them to reduce so easily, but I think it is still encouraging that the then-biggest short apparently chose to close completely and the second biggest chose to reduce.

Robert Keith buying more so I decided to follow suit.

14th June according to this morning's RNS. Seems to be stretching the boundaries of "early June" a bit.

Decided to take a punt with a small stake in these today. Initially brought to my attention in conversation with shroder, it seems to me the company is at an interesting stage of development. The CEO is back and apparently very bullish according to his recent results statement: "However, for the first time in its history, the Company has the combination of world leading technologies and the balance sheet to create a world class biopharma company... ...With the commencement of the Quark trials, the approach from a potential licensee and the significant broadening of the AtuRNAi patent estate, we are of the belief that these opportunities alone could be very significant relative to the current size of the Company." Clearly (IMO) risky from the science and regulatory approvals side, as with any biotech, but looks to have a reasonably solid base of larger investors who I would presume have done some due diligence in these areas. A commercial risk is perhaps getting dragged into litigation, given the apparent disagreement with Quark over rights to 2015 revenue and the comment on the applicability of the US patent: "the Company has received advice from three separate law firms indicating that the issued claims potentially capture other development stage siRNA candidates."

"Full-year results are expected to be announced in early June 2016." So any time from tomorrow...

Some big trades gone through today, although at a rather uninspiring price.

Looks intriguing. Anyone any idea what it represents?

Yesterday's holdings notice only accounts for 20,000 shares. They seem to have acquired these (out of 41,400 reported on yahoo! finance) on 24th May. The notice was triggered by the subsidiary (FIL UK) going over the 5% threshold, by which I presume FIL is under the 5%/10% disclosing regime rather than the 3%,4%,5%,6%,... regime. But the notice also reveals that FIL have acquired 1.3 million shares since their previous holdings notice triggered on 4th January, moving up to an aggregate 7.07% holding, from the 5.60% holding reported then. Difficult to say when they acquired the bulk of the shares, but seems reasonable to think they may have picked some up during the Morgan Stanley/Toscafund/Sports Direct volume around 24th March.

Griffiths (or his companies) would be the "person" not the "issuer" under these rules, wouldn't he? The "issuer" is blinkx, and its "home state" is the UK, so blinkx falls under the rules. Griffiths then holds the shares on his own behalf I presume, he is not managing them on behalf of someone else, so I don't see how he could be exempt from the 3% and incremental 1% thresholds.

Link to FCA handbook below. I know we've had this conversation, shroder, but I keep coming back to this list (DTR 5.1.2) of whole-number thresholds (3% then each 1% above that). There are some exceptions under 5.1.3 to 5.1.5 (e.g. OEICs as River & Mercantile pointed out - see second link which specifically mentions OEICs). Plus, in this particular case, Richard Griffiths disclosed crossing each of the 6%, 7%, 8%, 9% and 10% thresholds on the way up first time round, so I would expect him to disclose at 8%, 9% and 10% if he gets there again. I don't know where the 7% disclosure went to but they do sometimes seem to go astray or get forgotten. https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/DTR/5/1.html http://hb.betterregulation.com/external/UKLA%20TN%20546.1.pdf

Not long until "early June" and the results now, then it shouldn't be long after that before we get the annual report, which will have the definitive major shareholders list in it.

There is a lot of info in the remuneration report, but it is difficult to interpret. As I understand it, in FY16 BM was awarded: Salary: $500k (a 25% increase on the $400k in FY15) Bonus: $62k (less than 50% of the FY15 $138k and only 15% of the $404k in FY14) Options: 7m market value share options (MVSOs) If you remember, in the FY15 report, there was the statement that "The Chief Executive's base salary and bonus opportunity for FY2016 has been increased to bring these into line with market levels..." So looking at this statement, together with the bonus history, I think we can see that BM has received an extremely low bonus in FY16 compared to likely opportunity. i.e. he has been "punished" for the awful FY16 financial performance. But he has benefitted from the re-setting of salary (25% increase) which was independent of current year performance and also from the huge options award, which was the subject of much discussion on the bulletin boards when it was announced. Having said that, the options award, if I remember right, although set at market value (i.e. the exercise price would be the market price of the shares at the time the award was made), doesn't vest for some time and also not until the share price reaches 50p or so (and remains there for some time), so given where the share price currently is, this does at least provide some alignment with shareholders. The $913k "long-term incentive" listed in the table of FY16 remuneration is in fact (I believe) a valuation of incentive awards relating to earlier grants which have vested in FY16 (so nothing to do with FY16 performance). He "exercised" (i.e. converted to shares) 200k RSUs which were awarded in FY14 (this was the regular 50k/quarter vesting, awarded in September 2013) and more significantly 2.3m shares vested under the US share option plan (awarded 3 or 4 years ago perhaps?). So this $913k is I believe a "fair-value" assessment of the value of these awards at the point of vesting, although I can't quite reconcile this with the comment that the "aggregate value of the long-term incentives as at 31 March 2016 was $nil." All the options may have been under-water at this date, but would still have had a positive "fair value".

Virtually unchanged. http://www.comscore.com/Insights/Rankings?keywords=&tag=&country=US&publishdate=&searchBtn=GO

Now on the blinkx site. I've put a post on the advfn and and ii boards with some observations - most notably perhaps the fact that RG appears to have increased his stake since the last published holdings notice in November.

I agree the business looks to be positioned well for the immediate future, the question is how well can they execute? Given Brian's comments on still having to scale various ad formats, I was surprised they were not more bullish about the prospects for FY17 (aiming just for adjusted EBITDA profitability sounds unambitious) so I wonder how much they have been thrown by the collapse in fill rates in 4Q? We should get a fascinating insight into how they see the longer-term future by the revenue growth rates they put in the annual report, which should be out very soon now given the AGM timing. They have goodwill against both RhythmOne and AdKarma CGUs ("cash generating units") as well as PVMG. So if they follow the pattern of recent years they should give us a 5-year compound growth rate assumption for revenue (and opex) for each CGU.

As best as I can tell, this is what Brian said on ad formats in response to the first question (Is R1 the finished article now?). "We have essentially gotten most of the ad formats in, except the ones that are heavier when it comes to the advertising formats of quality. So if you look at display, mobile display, mobile web, those are already in, even video on mobile apps are in. What we have not yet scaled is anything that includes native, video and rich media. These have not scaled yet. Those are already there but they have not scaled yet." That sounds like there is big scope for increasing rates (CPMs) as they get in particular video ads scaled on the platform. Or have I misunderstood? [ps By "mobile display, mobile web" does he mean "mobile banner"??]