Member Info for Amers

Based on my calculations — and I must stress this is only my opinion — the "Yes" vote would require approximately 800 million shares in favour to succeed. In comparison, only around 600 million votes were cast last time.

This coming Wednesday will be a crucial day for all shareholders and for GDR as a company. Only then will we truly understand the direction GDR’s future is heading.

EC for your info these r the rules

So if a shareholder increases their holding from below 10% to 10% or above, they must notify the company, and the company must announce it via RNS without delay.

📝 Who must act?

The shareholder must notify the company within 2 trading days.

The company must then issue an RNS "as soon as possible" (typically same day).

There seems to be something unusual going on. Based on the volume traded — over 300 million shares — it’s highly likely that at least one investor’s holding has increased by 1% or more. Under market rules, that should trigger a mandatory RNS disclosure. The absence of such an announcement this morning raises questions. Is it being delayed intentionally, perhaps until after the voting closes?

It's quite interesting that there was no RNS released this morning, especially considering that hundreds of millions of shares changed hands yesterday. One has to wonder — is the announcement being intentionally withheld until after the voting concludes?

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me take a moment to share my perspective as a fellow investor. If the "NO" vote prevails, I believe we will be in significantly safer and more competent hands. It’s important to consider that the largest shareholder, who has invested the most, would naturally act in the best interests of his investment — not against it.

While I am not the largest shareholder, I do have a significant stake in the company. In my view, the Board of Directors (BOD) has treated him unfairly in the most recent RNS. If the "NO" vote does not succeed, the current BOD may continue to face major hurdles before they are able to take meaningful action — which raises concerns about the company's future direction.

As an investor, I feel more confident aligning with the "NO" camp than with the current board. In business, repeated failure should not be rewarded — it should be investigated to uncover any potential underlying issues or agendas. Investors have waited over five years for progress, and yet the delivery has been underwhelming, with sales reaching just £1 million — hardly a milestone to celebrate.

I remain hopeful that better days are ahead. However, I must express that I no longer believe the current board possesses the capability to drive the company forward. It may be time for certain individuals to return to areas where they excel, rather than attempt to manage multiple demanding roles that require full commitment and focus.

I urge the board to make peace with the company’s major shareholder and consider whether he could deliver better outcomes than what we have seen over the past five years. Frankly, based on the quality of the recent RNS, it seems even AI could have done a more effective job than the current advisers.

Let’s strive for transparency, accountability, and a leadership team that genuinely prioritizes shareholder value.

No trade for 20 mins

Wait for the next news, which could be shattering!!!

Latino We will be well funded, make no mistake about it.

All calm down, fat lady has just started singing...wait for the next line.....

Darling Gloria watch this space!!!

Hold Your Shares — and Make Your Vote Count

Please don’t sell your shares on the cheap. The only thing you need to change is your vote — if you’ve voted YES, consider changing it to NO. That single action could make a real difference for you, your family, and all fellow shareholders.

Remember: together, we are stronger — and united, we can drive the change this company truly needs.

To All Shareholders,

Please don’t panic — DN has the best interests of all shareholders at heart. He is one of us. While he may not yet have the experience some would expect, consider the track record of the current Board: with all their experience, look at the position they’ve led us to.

Despite their claims of having done a good job promoting sales and securing contracts, the results tell a different story. Their priorities appear to lie more with securing their own paydays than ensuring the wellbeing of the company or its shareholders.

By voting NO, we send a clear message: shareholders will no longer be taken for granted.

I believe DN will secure funding on terms that work for all shareholders — not just for the Board. And that may well be the sticking point: control. They want us to join their club, but on their terms. It's time to reverse that dynamic — and make it ours.

Abr every broker has different way of voting.

Choochie I won't lie to you or any other suffering LTH, I have spoken to DN few times.

Cjinvest Thanks and Thanks for voting no. We will be in safe hands with DN, that I can assure you.

RNS Announcements Are Company Communications

RNS announcements are official disclosures made by a listed company to the market via a regulatory-approved channel (like the London Stock Exchange’s RNS).

These are submitted by authorized persons within the company (e.g. Company Secretary, Investor Relations team, etc.) using secure systems provided by the RNS provider.

No signature is required on the RNS itself — the fact that it’s been submitted through the company’s secure channel implies authorization.

📄 Common Format of an RNS

Title of announcement

Date and time

Company name

Main content (e.g., trading update, director dealing, results, etc.)

Often ends with a note like:

"Enquiries:

Company Name – [Contact Person / Title / Phone]"

Even in sensitive disclosures (like director share dealings, profit warnings, or takeovers), you won't see a signature — just standard corporate contact info.

🔒 Accountability

Behind the scenes, only authorized individuals with RNS credentials can submit announcements.

The FCA and LSE can audit and trace who submitted what, ensuring accountability without the need for a public signature.

Summary:

✅ Yes, a company can issue an RNS without a signature. This is the norm. The responsibility lies in the secure submission process and corporate governance, not in a visible signature on the document.

Jimi or anyone else explain to me Shares in Issue 1.02b, does that include 400ml just been issued? If so how can we vote, if we don't know our allocation?

Jimi As company doesn't have much debt, DN could take Bonds on GDR, in return for money and seat on the BOD. Thats how big companies do raise money.

Stephen11 - I think it will be on the 15th during the GM, that how it was with last meeting. I will be attending anyone else going?

To Shareholders Still Undecided,

If you're still unsure which way to vote, let me reassure you: under DN’s leadership, we stand to regain far greater control of our company’s future than we currently have with the existing Board of Directors.

To those considering a yes vote — I ask you to reflect: what progress can you point to? What sales or contracts have been delivered — in the UK, the Eurozone, or the Middle East? If the current Board genuinely sought your backing, they could have issued an RNS updating us on the status of the FDA application. Yet we’ve had silence.

If you vote yes and nothing changes — if the same lack of delivery continues — then it will be too late to complain. You will have voted to continue down the same path.

Please think carefully before casting your vote. This may be a rare opportunity to choose a different direction.