Member Info for bluerill

In fact, the deal will be way oversubscribed. That's not an issue. The semi-tidying up of the debt side of the balance sheet, by forcing conversion of some of the CB and converting some of the balance into zero coupon bonds and thus the much improved cash flow prospects, makes new entrance into the name at 2p highly attractive. Plus these deep discount deals on PrimaryBid are flying off the shelves. It will certainly pressure the sp for a while, but I don't think we'll trade much below 2.5p tomorrow.....

'....How on earth can the market put a value on this with no guidance on any bid / sales price?... James, this is part of what markets do. Shares trading under a 'formal bid process' but without any definitive price information is completely common. One of the very reasons there is a Takeover Code that in part is there to govern a situation such as this, is so shares CAN trade under relatively clear rules on imperfect information AND so that very process in the public market can then produce invaluable information - the clearing price for the shares under that imperfect information (as I have tried to explain previously) - that is then used by the interested parties and the Company in their negotiations. In other words, getting the shares trading again and seeing where the market 'values' the company under these POTENTIAL bid conditions is absolutely central to the whole process, which is why EVERYONE involved wants the shares to re-quote in the first place (also, as I explained before).

'....personally I wish it had stayed suspended until a sale.....' Again: That is NOT how the world works. There is no 'bid' yet announced, ergo there is no bid yet, ergo the company MUST re-list the shares as soon as practicable. That is the prime directive of any stock exchange's regulator. No one can arbitrarily allow its shares to remain suspended in order to 'wait' for a formal bid

'...It's only my imagination, but i feel another RNS coming to give an offer received value which we will quickly rerate to...'
Tell your gut not to give up its day job. Not how the world works. Note I was off by a few days, but roughly correct. Delay was clearly just technical in nature. Everything to play for from here, but know the process is just beginning.

Tim, its an interesting concept and companies do occasionally allow for 'improving liquidity' as a factor when considering an equity capital raise. But that is only when the main consideration is that the Company has some need for the capital in the first place, which San Leon clearly do not, having in fact a significant cash surplus which it is currently in the process of deciding how to allocate. If a company in sle's huge surplus cash position were to consider raising funds primarily to try and improve liquidity in its share trading, the negative 'information effect' (ie., why would a company with so much cash in the bank and over 2x that amount due in over the next year, need dough in the first place?) would be seen to far outweigh the hoped for improvement in trading for the shares and would never be pursued. The one exception to that of course would be if the company were to be holding a substantial balance of shares in its Treasury account, the result say of having done a share buyback and not cancelled the shares. In our case here though, sle have in fact cancelled all the shares it repurchased through its massive tender and subsequent daily buyback last year, so that option is also not available.

Is how some wags might well have dismissed RockRose. Every oil company shareholder should be so lucky:

http://pdf.reuters.com/htmlnews/htmlnews.asp?i=43059c3bf0e37541&u=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20200706:nRSF0985Sa
· Under the terms of the Acquisition, each RockRose Shareholder will
be entitled to receive:

in respect of each RockRose Share 1,850 pence in cash (the "Consideration")

· The Consideration represents:

o a premium of 64 per cent. to the Closing Price of 1,130 pence per RockRose
Share on 3 July 2020 (being the last Business Day prior to the date of this
Announcement);

from below (in case you missed it): '...What is with you two morons? The confidence VSA showed in the Company in taking shares in lieu of cash is a simple, objective fact. Since taking those shares, the price is up 57%, so their informed bet has paid off. Huge. I say, good on them, and whatever they've done or do with their holding since is their business. They're a small brokerage firm - NOT an investment manager - with bills to pay, a small business to run in the teeth of a global pandemic. If they have reduced their holding, and I have no idea they have, it would be absolutely, perfectly understandable with no negative connotations towards IES whatever. Besides, who knows?, if they have sold shares, they likely did so to a client who is just the sort of quality, long-term investment manager everyone here wants to see on the share register, alongside Schroders - furthering the positive information effect. You and your mini-me's endless efforts at negative spin on even the most trivial of positive issues surrounding this Company is frankly, perverse. Like trying to deal with a couple of crackheads stuck in the Communion queue....'

I was too generous. You are beyond and beneath measurable stupidity levels.

What is with you two morons? The confidence VSA showed in the Company in taking shares in lieu of cash is a simple, objective fact. Since taking those shares, the price is up 57%, so their informed bet has paid off. Huge. I say, good on them, and whatever they've done or do with their holding since is their business. They're a small brokerage firm - NOT an investment manager - with bills to pay, a small business to run in the teeth of a global pandemic. If they have reduced their holding, and I have no idea they have, it would be absolutely, perfectly understandable with no negative connotations towards IES whatever. Besides, who knows?, if they have sold shares, they likely did so to a client who is just the sort of quality, long-term investment manager everyone here wants to see on the share register, alongside Schroders - furthering the positive information effect. You and your mini-me's endless efforts at negative spin on even the most trivial of positive issues surrounding this Company is frankly, perverse. Like trying to deal with a couple of crackheads stuck in the Communion queue.

Seriously, what in the world are you even talking about? Its like trying to deal with Russian propaganda and a firehose of lies. No matter how many times I correct you, you insist on repeating more mendacious nonsense. One more time: VSA were the co-lead manager on this Company's crucial fundraise during the most hellacious market conditions since 2008. For that SERVICE, they are ENTITLED to a significant fee, as has been the case since as long as there have been equity markets. That is literally how capital market services work. However, instead of taking cash, which they would have been entitled to and the Company was now capable of paying, VSA opted to take their fee in shares instead, a clear vote of confidence in the company's future, whether you have the bandwidth to understand that or not.

More nonsense, now combined with an outrageous slur. Nice work. 'Paid research' is utterly ubiquitous now on AIM bc the Mifid2 rules have made it completely uneconomic for brokers to cover vast sections of small cap companies. Likewise, 'traditional' research from brokerage firms has long since been questioned for its independence anyway as other parts of the bank ares thought to be pitching for the Company's financing business and therefore pressuring the analyst to write positive reports. Its horses for courses unfortunately. What's important is the credibility of the analysis and the integrity of the analyst and VSA is in fact one of the better regarded firms both as advisor and in research, you ignorant putz.

hapless = wise? insightful? countervailing? spot on? invaluable counterweight to hateful ignorance attempting to pass itself off as insight??? Gosh, who knew

yes

Like being attacked by a bunch of Karens.

Hallster is a bit of a prankster. He and I are engaged in a bit of a one-sided battle on another board where he's being just a tiny bit insane so he thought it would be clever and come on here and post some gibberish about the only thing he knows less about than eurasia mining.

As for the Spurs comment, I was trying to think of something that always feels like it could be right around the corner but turns out to be illusory

ok, I'll bite. where, oh where am I ridiculously wrong?

and to you, Carlito: I already answered that, but more importantly, ask yourself why that matters? short answer: it doesn't.

See now Luap, that's nonsense comment really hurt, but here's the thing: My 'posting history' is meaningless; whether I'm a nice guy or not is likewise, and most of all, your (completely mistaken fwiw) 'opinion' of me is the most inconsequential thing of all. This is not a therapy board where priority should be seeking or giving friendly pats on the bum, nor should it matter if someone's preference happens to be the opposite. What matters is only if you know what you're talking about and on this, and many of finance/market related subjects, i do and others here most assuredly do not. You want 'common sense', read my posts. My primary message is based on a simple, common sense reality: this whole situation is just not that unusual, yet many here seem to want to treat it like Spurs winning the FA cup or something. The company mines a relatively scarce commodity, it opened a strategic review late last year, which has seen multiple parties emerge who are interested either in some or all of their main assets or the entire company, and this has resulted in a formal sale process overseen by the Takeover Panel. This is great news and could well end in a takeout of the equity at a substantial premium to the suspension price. But I hate to break it to you all, for reasons good and ill, it also may not (though I concede that the former is more likely as there is clearly multiple party interest and an underlying product with a solid supply-demand outlook). Meanwhile, anyone who thinks that the shares will stay suspended one second longer than is allowed after the citic RNS is issued, is high. The parties that matter in this thing all need and want the shares to start trading as soon as possible, period, bc as I have tried several times to explain, a clearing price established over a reasonable time frame, in the public market, is the THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT VARIABLE IN THIS ENTIRE PROCESS GOING FORWARD FOR PARTIES ON BOTH SIDES OF ANY DEAL. Every other bit of idle speculation about the board of directors, the price of palladium, who might be in the data room, the phase of the moon and any and all other stuff and nonsense, pales into insignificance relative to establishing a market price. And finally - again: sorry - the idea that the suspension price is somehow unimportant in all this and that the share price is simply going to immediately rocket to some kind of magical NPV of assets in the ground or some such upon re-opening, is also a drug-addled notion. Is that common enough for you?

you do understand that citic is simply excess to need now that UBS has been hired, right? It's a minor issue