Member Info for apunter2

Weathergeek, have you researched drag and tag ? I have been mentioning it all morning... it is a thing
Only some apply

Remember interview lots of institution attention, but one was referred to in that way ...

Today’s interview will be all about today’s RNS ... where one goes In the rest will follow .. penny share or not

Bit of a theory, we know AZ had to cover first loss, about £2.5mill raised, using shares as collateral.

Then somehow he finds £11million to buy shares off market, to only transfer £6.5mill to institution who doesn’t want to be seen to be backing AZ and SYME, Hence 2.7% not 3% as that would mean they have to declared

They are strengthening AZ position at the same time as having voting rights.

Just musing

Weathergeek, promise no more from me till interview but I have been banging on about TAG from tag and drag. Not take over though that doesn’t apply .. as AZ said he will never sell his shares.. important to investors he said ..

Printing other people’s money we take 2% hahahah
Ain’t it beautiful

Your assumptions are not far out. Just the p/e is wrong model.. this is fast growing so Peggy it is .

Good luck. Your the Best poster on here

So you would agree in my statement, best risk reward anywhere.. and I mean anywhere

You hit the nail on the head there, all this is about expansion. Efficiency, partners .. huge demand and the need to move quickly. Monetisation is the key
Your figures with dear old PEGGY? Give it a go

MR008, your not far wrong, we have seen odd trading for days now .. I have used the 1000 code to show how it’s being traded sideways constantly.
Why . Because someone is telling them too ..
IMHO ..

I seen the response to your email.
In my history I have addressed how we got it wrong.
But we are absolutely correct at the same time.
Now add end to end and you’ll see why one institutional as AZ called them doesn’t care if we are a penny stock.. in last interview

Forget daily.. think 6 months ahead. Think year 2

Herekittykitty, indeed and at 0.6872.. tag reference is telling us that it is way under actual value of the company ..

Tag and drag !!

Sharebel, exactly, remember his interview when he said I will never sell my shares.. important for retail investors !!!

They have to play

Weathergeek, our previous thread .. yes?

Also tag and drag .. yes?

All becomes clear on his institutional quote in last interview .. yes?

I am trying really hard

I just see this as past of the scaling up and efficiency AZ has mentioned in the past two interviews.

Today’s interview is a must see now..
aye TAG

You have to think from an institution point of view
They are not going to pump in their money to funding clients without a say, either seat on the board or via voting rights and that takes shares .. we only have a board of 4 or 5 .. that’s not going to last forever .. 9-12 more appropriate

Note the TAG in RNS..
Protection where shares are sold, protecting minority share holders where the shares are sold significantly less than the value of the company

Would that explain the previous .. £11mill ?
No idea

Weathergeek, hope you catch up with this thread, as bed time for me

If you apply AZ remarks and email, from his perspective each point of sale will generate a repay of stock. That’s the transaction finished with. The next inventory is a completely new transaction. Same client, But different Funder perhaps.
That stock is sold and repaid. Draw another line under that.. and on it goes for three years
So we are saying the same thing just not taking into account each transaction is a separate entity. But the out come are the same in both cases
Once you apply that to AZ email his reply makes sense... takes a bit of doing that though lol

Jonesrichard, you will not find a better risk reward ratio anywhere

Weathergeek, thanks for response, I am still awaiting mine.

I knew AZ clarified our thinking somewhere, from 1;57 to 2;20 in
He just defined as 1st inventory sold closes transaction then 2nd inventory purchased. So rolling contact IMHO it’s all inline with his email.
Just his definition is different to ours. Hope you agree

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbDOgnOYRmM