Member Info for Adyan9200

Oleric - I also have some shares in PBX in my iWeb account (which coincidentally is run by Halifax).

You should have got an e-mail or message from them when you originally got the shares where they said they don't trade in them and therefore if you wish to trade them you will need to transfer to a provider that does trade in them.

AJBell trade in them, so you could move them there. I've got some in my AJBell account and plan to move the ones in my iWeb account to AJBell. I had hoped PBX would move to the AIM Market so never moved them, but as that never happened and doesn't seem it is going to happen anytime soon, I plan to transfer them across.

I'm think II and a few others trade in them also, but you'll need to look into it.

I'm speechless, not sure what to say anymore.

I thought I was missing something when I couldn't find the Seneca statement that the Probiotix RNS mentioned was in Appendix A. I even checked the Aquis website directly and probiotix website, but couldn't find an Appendix A listed anywhere. Could it have been excluded on purpose from the RNS?

This latest RNS from OPTI seems to confirm our suspicions and worst fears regarding what Steen has been up to, and anyone who thinks it was for the best interest of share-holders, I really don't know what to say to you. Surely it must be bordering on the criminal.

I just don't understand why Steen would do this?

As to our independent directors, they should have been protecting shareholders and shareholder value, how on earth did they allow Steen to get away with this and now continue to support him, as though Steen built up the company from the ground up, and without him it would fail etc.

Sorry, but the whole board needs removing IMO and some decent independent Directors need to be appointed who truly have share-holder value at heart, hopefully one from Seneca would be greatly helpful.

It seems Steen and board are trying to prevent OPTI from voting, I really hope they fail in that endeavour.

If they truly want a fair vote, how about we prevent both OPTI and the new shares (aka Mr Bruhn-Petersen) from being able to vote, I can guarantee you, easily more than 50% of votes cast will vote for the resolutions.

@martinu - It really depends

- I think those employees who where there before Steen, would stay put

- Those who Steen brought in, again I can't see them suddenly leaving, they would need to give notice at the minimum and won't want to be out of a job until they found somewhere else if they did decide to leave.

- This isn't a business where Steen was the founder, and we're trying to remove the founder type of situation either.

Also, as Steen isn't being removed unjustly, I don't think there is the Moral side to this, where employees might show solidarity with Steen because he's being removed unjustly or such.

I don't think Probiotix is the type of business where if we lose an employee, we're going to lose a lot of business. As majority of our revenue is from established clients, I'm not too worried. It is possible we could lose some new prospective clients that Steen has contacts with and it could cause delays with onloading new clients and will affect the speed of progress we're making.

I think if anyone did leave, it'll be easy to replace them, especially with the type of salary that Probiotix tends to pay.

I think no matter how promising a share/business looks, everyone will have there own rules on when to exit, whether that is 10%, 20%,, 50%. Which is fair play to them.

I think many of us have exited shares and missed out when they have gone to multi-bag over the years. I remember I got in W7L (Warpaint) when it was around £1 and the following year it got close to £4, and a few months more later got to £6.

However for me personally, I've never been more certain of the potential for a company to multi-bag many times over thank I am for SBTX, therefore I'm not gonna make the mistake of exiting out too early.

@NewBeer

I do not know Steen personally, therefore I can only judge him based on his actions regarding probiotix. Even if I knew him personally, as a shareholder if he's doing things that goes against the best interest of shareholders, I have to judge him on that.

As regards attacking OPTI and SOH to justify Steen's action, does not make sense. I have criticized SOH performance on these very boards many times, chief among them being spinning out Probiotix in the first instance and then the ridiculous decision of listing it on a Aquiss Market. Therefore you will not see me defending him.

Most private investors are NOT unhappy with Steen because of whatever is going on with him and SOH/OPTI, we are angered by his actions on the share raise when the companies share price was at the lowest and to a friend and the amount of dilution, esp after we we're told we we're fully funded just a few weeks before the raise.

Therefore the latest RNS and your own post do not seem to understand why private investors and Seneca are so unhappy. The RNS barely seemed to answer why the share raise was needed, why at the maximum dilution, why when share price was at the lowest, why Steen didn't try to promote the share price and progress (apart from this last month)? If you know Steen personally, please do answer these questions.

The RNS seemed so occupied with OPTI/SOH and their performance that they seem to have forgotten why investors (excluding OPTI) are unhappy with Steen.

If Steen had NOT done the Share Raise or had done a minimal amount say 5-10% dilution with proper justification, then I think most Share-holders would be against the Resolutions.

Mol42 thanks for the figures.

Seems Steen would need 35m retail investor shares to vote for him, which would be extremely unlikely.

I would love to hear why the independent board members think the fundraise was justified especially at the maximum 23% and especially after the Aug AGM saying fully funded.

I predicated that we would see a gradual increase in share price leading up to the CRODA forecast/revenue, I don't expect to see big spike increases. I do think some people are waiting for the CRODA forecast/revenue to be released before committing, as I think people like TW have created doubt in some peoples minds. This is perfectly fine, as many of us have been in similar positions where we're promised something and buy in advance or increase our holding and then it fails to materialize.

However, I do believe 99% this is happening therefore those getting in now are going to benefit greatly.

Thanks mol42.

I've just had a read of the "Statement from Seneca" in that document. I thought it was very well worded and good to know the major shareholder's seem to have the same worry as many of us smaller private investors. The Denmark aspect isn't a big thing for me, but I can see why other shareholders might view that differently.

Interesting to read "All of this comes despite Seneca having open dialogue with the Board within the last month, where the cash position was described as being “ahead of plan” and noting that commercial developments were progressing well."

I agree with FriedmanSowell. I would still 100% vote him out and from the information in the RNS, it just convinces me even more esp with it increasing my suspicion on the real reason for the raise/dilution. I have the same fear that he could screw over existing shareholders in future.

It seems there has been some beef brewing between Steen and OPTI, now I don't know what has been happening there, but OPTI have to be extremely stupid to then go ahead and give him the power "voting all its shares in favour by proxy", if you've already got beef with him and would like to have him removed.

I can only make decisions based on the RNS's and trading updates they provide. Therefore if your saying your fully funded, no need to raise etc then I can only make a judgement based on that. To then turn around and do a very dilutive fund raise at maximum % at a very low price to a friend, without taking into consideration what effect it would have on existing shareholders, tells me this CEO is not taking share-holders into account. If he had raised say half or such, I might think, they must need money or have some exciting opportunity hence the raise.

Now reading this RNS, this is all conjecture on my behalf, that Steen was worried about being removed, so he's decided to get his friend in with cheap shares and dilute massively existing shareholders, with the hope that OPTI wouldn't be able to force him out as OPTI would need other shareholders now to vote Steen out. I haven't yet seen any solid reason for the maximum fundraise allowed so far to dispel this notion from my mind.

When a CEO is willing to do that, I personally cannot trust them at all.

The other reasons to remove him:

- He didn't seem to take any action to try to promote the share and prevent it sliding.

- Updates were very rare and only in last month has been be active.

- Majority of the increase in revenue has nothing to do with him, instead it's our partner Seed.

- In this latest RNS, he mentioned Cholbiome Opti sell, and that Probiotix can just give OPTI 6 months notice and they won't be able to sell that. This seems like a threat to me.

So it only required £20k of share buying for it to leap from 4p to 8p after Steen started sharing progress etc.

Just goes to show if Steen really needed to raise money, if he had waited, he could have raised the same amount of money but given half the dilution than he did.

I thought the Presentation was excellent and everything seems to be progressing superbly. I think many of the things people had questions about were answered, esp as shareholders need to understand the secrecy around certain information when working which large companies that just cannot be released into the public domain.

For those talking about the 13% loan, I think you guys really need to do some research on what the current commercial loan rates are currently (this is nothing like your typical mortgage rate). The other thing to note is, there is a grace period of 2 years, where only interest needs to be paid.

This is awesome news and acquisition. SA has definitely listened and learnt in finding funding for this latest Acquisition that is much better structured.

The Company is now on solid footing even without the Croda revenue, so with Croda forecasts due end Oct/Nov and revenue by year end, that is just going to put rocket boosters to progress and profitability.

Totally agree Friedman.

In this latest RNS, he mentions "The recent fundraise has been crucial, as it has allowed us to increase our inventory to help fulfil against booked sales orders."

After saying previously we're fully funded to profitability, suddenly he needed to raise ~£1.3m, makes no sense. Okay, say you did need money as you needed to increase the inventory, surely you would:

1. See if you can borrow money from banks, giving proof of booked sales and reason for the borrowing, banks would be much more likely to lend.

2. Only raise the minimum amount required to increase inventory with least amount of dilution. There's no way we're spending £1.3m on inventory. To go for the full 23% dilution just doesn't make sense. If he had said I need £500K (~10% dilution) to increase inventory as we need to fulfil orders, I would have accepted. But to dilute at 23% and get maximum from a friend, just does not sit well with me at all.

I'm very frustrated with SOH for separating out Probiotix from OPTI in the first place, when no-one seemed to think it was a good idea at the time and most of the initial money raised seemed to have gone to pay exorbitant salaries.

I had no worries about Probiotix reaching profitability, but just can't see any valid reason for the share raise and dilution.

Is it me or has Steen suddenly realised he has shareholders who he needs to keep updated on progress and help promote share price. Suddenly he seems to be releasing RNS a lot more, geez I wonder why. If only he had done this previously, maybe the share price could have been much higher.

Mol42 - this is what I mean, it seems SOH is being kept out of the loop on things (share issue, now possibly this), therefore whenever they say board, you have to take it with a pinch of salt. It means SOH can't object until it's too late.

Also saying SOH is conflicted, doesn't seem relevant as generally large holders would have someone on the board, and the whole point of a board is to prioritise the interest of shareholders and stakeholders.

Bk2011 is right on. I think many shareholders are worried Steen will further dilute us if he can and take company private. I rather take the hit to remove him, than risk him staying and doing exactly that.

My issue is that Steen did not take existing shareholders into consideration at all and there has been no good reason given for the raise, with latest RNS saying "it has provided growth capital to fund future expansion."

The Second RNS today, says he did not even approach the existing shareholders before going ahead with a massive dilutive fund raise, because previously they had not shown interest.

When raising money especially via share subscription, you need to:

1. Have a solid reason and plan for the money, and defined benefits it will provide.

2. Ensure it is vital for the Company and take existing share-holders into account.

3. Approach existing shareholders first, explaining (1). They are more likely to provide money if they are given solid reasons.

4. There are many other things also, such as timing and current share price. As we're close to profitability, isn't it better to wait to see if that helps improve the share price etc.

IMO Steen has not done any of the above and I believe has totally loss trust of majority of shareholders and needs to go. But he has screwed us, as even if we succeed in removing him, he's done the damage and we will have to pay him off.

Yes, Seneca, way to go. RNS for general meeting proposal.

"Proposed Resolution 1: To remove Steen Andersen as a Director of the Company.

Proposed Resolution 2: To remove Frederik Bruhn-Petersen as a Director of the Company.

Proposed Resolution 3: To remove any person appointed by the Board, after the date of this notice, as a Director of the Company."

As SOH mentioned previously in an RNS

"The Company is in discussion with a wide range of industry partners over product application and launch timescales, some already announced and some with new potential partners, across a wide range of areas and will make announcements once these have been concluded. Given previous experience with some investors contacting partners pretending to be employed or representing OptiBiotix and damaging relationships, the Company wishes to maintain confidentiality in this area to protect the best interests of shareholders."