Member Info for apunter2

"I have an email from Alessandro confirming Names and Figures will come"

They will have no option as they will want more than 3% ..

When named watch out for term like “strategic partnership” eg. Indirect investor

From article

“The company says it is currently analysing whether to syndicate this first securitisation issuance or work on an exclusive basis with one of these funds.”

Still think it’s the next round .. as per RNS but I will take that too

Extrader. Absolutely .. in interview ‘few days‘.. cost him that one

Again you missed the point it’s not about how wealthy the man is. It’s all about the size of the buy compared to other directors,
See earlier post and go find me Someone who bought at that amount down in these leagues

Right.
Over and out no giving you more ammunition to keep fill the board up

Weathergeek, where has he been is also a consideration.

Extrader... 6 months listed. .... DD is the manual part .. hence Subcontractor.... hence AZ focus on efficiency...
As I keep saying you are a details man, I like it... what is your down fall is you can’t see the big picture.. not me saying it .. I refer you to all RNS from July .....every one. Every share transaction too .... even the price monitors and their extensions lol

But as that post 18;05, Either last Friday or Sunday, shows why your in my green room your not interested as there is always one other small niggle that will bring the house down

What I say to you, is Chairman buys £1.5 mill ....
get over it

That’s no worries, don’t be to hung up on 1AF2, just AZ said it was a special investment vehicle so I used it for an example ..

You get back to your roofing and I will be here,

Good luck and all the best to you and yours Extrader

And your point is before you go back to the green room lol

Extrader .. you answered your own question

The Directors and Proposed Directors believe that the Enlarged Group should seek principally to generate
capital growth for its Shareholders but may recommend dividends at some future date,

When I was doing my DD I emailed AZ
I had lots of question .. One was do you foresee dividend payments in the future .. he just said Yes

Sorry extrader I can’t prove that post, believe me or not, won’t bother me,

You sure you want to go down the road of £225mill after that response?
Not even 6 months on the market ..

Weathergeek absolutely..

Now think of it all from an ii perspective ..

I don’t think I am wrong but if anyone can prove I am wrong it’s extrader.. lol

Extrader your in the green room too. So luckily I have layout open and chat open as I keep that closed normally,

Your absolutely right .. so follow my thinking .
One identifier unique code .. produced sold repayed .. yes
Next item exactly the same but different identifier
Funded again. Sold repaid .. so they can follow the process..

Always liked you, shame you spoiled it,

Weathergeek .. his reply to me in English..

Manufacturers pay an annual fee (regardless of the number of times they return ) consequently it has to pay no additional fees”

Manufacturers pay an annual fee (regardless of the number of returns) consequently it has to pay no additional fees”

See ?

IMHO

Weathergeek, that email response has baffled me too remember that answer was in reference to the question that had us baffled,
From Questions and answer interview.
@can you fund the inventory twice..”

The answer was no Red flag etc as you pointed out

So you can’t and don’t fund the inventory twice

My response from AZ when I questioned him the same question and also about the collateral,

“Manufacturers pay an annual fee (regardless of the number of returns) consequently it has to pay no additional fees”

For me it says

each funding is complete at point of sale. Client then settle with the Funder. Transaction complete .. But there is always inventory being produced..
Second batch of inventory client returns to SYME for next batch of funding. Different funders different stock. Point of sale that stock is repaid.. draw a line under that . Next stock etc .. for three years. So not new inventory each time. It’s same products going into same end product . Follow me ?

AZ has to think each funding contract ends there is a completely new funding for stock
Thinking of an individual contract each transaction covers manufacturing or other clients who turn over stock maybe yearly or six months, whatever

Always does my head in thinking of his reply to you lol

You are so unlucky I seen you post in live prices as I have you In a green in box,

You can’t call me a ramper, because as much as you would like to you can’t argue what I saying, as I quoting RNS’s as I go

Why would I care what Holly has to say, your posting under at least two names Also

Over and out ..

Enjoy your day seadoc

Phoenix, spot in being audit for the past 18 months

You can call me a ramper, but you can’t prove it lol

Weathergeek, the total number of companies isn’t the selling point IMHO,

AZ said End to End, if we take manufacturing that means the same part could be bought by funders repeatedly as it travels through The supply chain

2-we both have put up links for EU manufacturing date that shows from manufacturing to point of sale is 52 days,
From my question emailed to AZ each transaction is a separate entity so funders get 4/5% every 52 days

ii’sall over this, you better believe it ,,, also ... not even 6 month listed anndddddd chairman buys £1.5mill ...

From RNS funders want to take whole of next round. You can see why in this climate

3. Italian Sell-funding agreements

The Company has agreed the key terms of the partnership with 2 local Banks. With one of these, the Parties are studying a more extended relationship. Pursuant to banking regulation, the agreements with SYME will be approved by the relevant internal committees by the end of September

Note- one deal done it’s the second deal that is being expanded and has to go through committee, the first bank is done deal as you can’t say deal until it goes through committee first. For me it’s Arse over tit .. RNS in days says AZ, Jeff time is a ticking on that one

But Jeff... You are absolutely correct .. AZ went off on one in the interview went from quoting soon to days ...I t bet DW went mental .. it has cost him though just as my previous post show he needs a high SP

Right Jeff.... think I am sorted, I will post notes under each section fo the RNS, which was also in the interview ...try and justify why what he says is actually true

part 1

5. Institutional equity agreements
By virtue of the huge underserved market and the unique - proven - inventory monetisation service, the strategic Partners above have been asking to SYME to invest - directly or indirectly - into the capital of the Company, pursuant to confidentiality agreements in place relating to the business alliances which are on track. These agreements anticipate both broker to broker transfers and open market transactions as recent trading has proved.

Note- if you read my indirect investor posts will will see that AZ claims are true and was RN’s on the 8th sept. Show the transfer and how AZ holding in SYME remain unchanged in Orchestra group. So if he gave them away or sold cheap his holdings would reduce . You will know from my posting AZ had use shares as collateral. So where did the £11million from
There has been a few transfers since that buy but now we know from the RNS ii have been investing indirectly eg not from market .. so this indirect is the key to my postings

‘Company, pursuant to confidentiality agreements in place relating to the business alliances which are on track.”
Also note NDA and on track.. everyone is doing what they said they would do lol

1. Securitised Note Issuance (through StormHarbour Securities)

As planned, the Company has received offers, subject to contract, from a number of large, global institutional investors, to provide funding, in the form of securitisation notes, in order to monetise more than €300m of inventory. There has been strong demand from a number of investment funds (including private equity and multilateral financial institutions supporting businesses that are promoting post COVID growth) which are individually requesting exclusivity for the securitisation notes issuance, and which are also remaining available for strategic support to the Company for the next funding rounds. The Company is currently analysing whether to syndicate this first securitisation issuance or work on an exclusive basis with one of the Funds mentioned above. Meanwhile SYME is keen to complete the signing of binding contracts with regard to the Client companies forming part of the securitisation portfolio by the end of September.

Note- this all shows rapid expansion but a spanner has been thrown in the works as one just one wants to fund the NEXT funding round,however as per RNS
‘which are individually requesting exclusivity for the securitisation notes issuance, and which are also remaining available for strategic support to the Company for the next funding rounds.. note strategic support ...note plural,.. rounds ....get it ?
So,contracts being signed for first round and all hell broke lose after that

Jeff. Sorry if my tone was abrupt before, I do see your dilemma. Before I post can I ask a favour. Can you go back into my postS and understand this indirect investment vehicle. It will address this ii cheapshares/give away your thinking happened... but I will address it all ... there is a complete disconnect between what AZ said and the RNS’s as people don’t understand the RNS’s
IMVHO of course

Just give me time please ... not even stated copying and paste yet

Jeff delighted you pointed this out but your first post riled me lol

Jeff, is that it .. hang on a bit I have copy and paste to do amongst other things ..will be right with you ..

Oh Jeff .. please please expand on that I am dying to hear this