George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
Seems the LSE **** tool removes capitalisation too ...
it's relevant to thg because that bull****ter @thecityspy blocks people who call him out for the bull****, but you can still see what he is bull****ting about, even if blocked. i suspect he is in an intimate relationship with another steve on this forum.
whales b0ll1x.
Might interest y'all to know that if someone blocks you on @Twitter, all you need to do in order to see their posts is ... logout.
Are you two lovers?
I wouldn't be hoping for 200p. I'd pitch for somewhere between 300p and 400p.
I see @TheCitySpy has blocked me on @Twitter. Don't think I'll be missing much ...
Feeling a bit "RNSy".
Looking like heading back to 2.1, with the current spread, probably b/o range 2.0 to 2.2, or lower. Yes, those numbers are in pennies. What is this company doing to justify a market capitalisation of just short of £20m? Good thing BradSmith keeps throwing money over the fence to fund TG's package. Hopefully you all enjoyed the spectacle over the weekend. Wasn't as much of a spectacle as this pile of horse manure.
"Ultimately if a deal is stuck the price will be whatever they agree to."
Thanks for the sage piece of wisdom. A lot of you guys seem to have your grumpy knickers on; is the coronation getting you down?
... that the price Apollo should need to pay would be far closer to the IPO price than some are imagining? There are a lot of holders well underwater with this. They will still be well underwater at £2.50.
This is not a blinking match. It is a co-operative endeavor. THG know what their price is. Apollo know where they need to pitch. Apollo came into the arena knowing that £1.70 didn't get them off the blocks.
Wouldn't be a case of discrediting. Would be a case of seeing how many similar hatchet jobs she's done previously and what companies/company directors she is regularly associated. A job the FCA should be doing, but do not.
Who has the article and the identity of the author(s).
I'm sure you will be proved wrong, unless this is going to be part of a campaign.
W.r.t. sanctions, pretty sure a Russian journalist (as rumoured) should not be publishing material through or on behalf of Bloomberg. That would place Bloomberg in violation of current export regulations and sanctions.
My question remains, which toe-rag wrote the piece?
No, not shorts to add, shorts to close. Also, definitely PIs to close longs, if margin is at play. Planting a dud in the media to drive the price down is definitely something a well funded hedgie could do to let them out on the cheap(er) if they believe a bid is coming. Who (which "journalist) attached their name to the article this morning?
C909, you sound you are buried up the boll1x in loss. **** p0sting in the f0rum is not going to make you money, and definitely not going to make it back if you lost it before. Sentiment indicators have it that 100% of people holding EQT are long. There were sellers today, probably because of pressure to close longs, due to interest rate actions and other macro factors. Your last post sounds like it was written on vodka or skank, at 1931h, bit early in the day for it. Maybe try to get a grip on yourself. If you are not objectively for the company's prospects, might be time to stop torturing yourself and find something new to believe in?
And the "city" playing with it this morning. Bloomberg "Investigates?" hit piece. SoTP £2.7b, or 195p per share ...
Link?
This can't have been normal editorial direction. Looks like paid placement for a purpose. Someone took a back-hander to do a hit piece.