Member Info for ceejay101

I agree. This will destabilise Russia. I would consider 2 weeks a quick conclusion. The war with Ukraine will collapse (fxpo might rally). Markets won't like a destabilised Russia, can poly be punished further... The russian assets could fall to nothing. The kaz listing won't be necessary. The binary bet is still there although short term this will drop, I might hoover some up

Any indication of when the audit will come through? I was expecting it last month.

Ignite Luxembourg Holdings, a company indirectly managed by Rhone Holdings VI, offered to buy a 20% stake in RHI Magnesita at GBP28.5 per share in cash, a 39% premium to the stock's close on Friday. Rhone said it aims to buy a non-controlling minority stake in Vienna-based supplier of refractory products. The offer values all of RHI Magnesita at GBP1.34 billion, or at GBP1.38 billion including a dividend recently declared by RHI Magnesita.

i've missed a couple of posts as had sold out and bought back in over a period. Are we expecting entry to the ASX300 soon?

Darktrace is an example of a shorters attack. In that instance they provided an instant rebuttal. The board and lawyers should have been in a position to provide a rebuttal. It seems weak to have to wait until the weekend unless they are getting the Ghanaian government to wade in as well

Will the suspension get lifted today?

Anyone traded polyus? Russian based gold company tradeable through gdr.

I noticed an RNs from them this morning

Im think the same, is there a future deal in sight with samsung on something else?

Given some of the commentary here i think there is a market in blockchain peer to peer betting on various outcomes of things.

only because we have exhausted to death the value of the settlement and SP.

When will the RNS land?
Today
Tomorrow
Friday AM
Friday PM
Monday

Are we expecting some upward movement as we head into the final furlong?

An interesting point on the percentages.

The 50% on $160m seems high. I would have thought by the time we get to $60m the % would drop quite quickly.

Nice to see people modelling once the known knowns are known.

I can't read the article but perhaps the headline triggered the fall 'polymetal to shift listing from London to kaz'

https://www.ft.com/content/98686967-d0a9-4a42-b2a7-2ea13d734f9d

when it comes to the settlement amount, i actually think you are all right and also all wrong.

I've posted on here previously about high/low settlement. The concept will allow N to breakdown the claim into multiple parts. Let's say
a. past US sales
b. past EU sales
c past ROW sale
d. future Whole world

I'm sure there are plenty of breakdowns for different line item. Each line item will have had a high and low value. Let's take US historic sales. A low value might be attributed to it based on earnings rather than revenue. The high value might incorporate a wilfuness element and be based on revenue or otherwise.

The settlement agreed would have resulted in Samsung putting the low value into a pot (which is guaranteed) and then a second sum determined through arbitration.

Why do i think you are all right and all wrong. Well, the low amount is what has been agreed so far. The outstanding bit is what will go through arbitration and will result in the settlement getting increased.

Revenues can be used although most likely in instances where the patentee is manufacturing. This makes sense to me as there would then be an associated economic loss of production.

Non producers would most likely on earnings.

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/investor/meeting/interim-results-for-the-period-ended-31-january-2022

I guess interim results next week then. Lots of Q&A then

I posted earlier today about high/low settlements.

https://www.stout.com/en/insights/article/getting-yes-high-low-patent-license-and-settlement-agreements

Having re-read it and the 2 main rns's I am of the view that the low value settlement was agreed..the remaining key points which have values attached will contribute to a higher settlement and are subject to further negotiations and agreement.

In the context of that the 2nd RNs makes more sense to me.

This is an interesting article.
https://www.stout.com/en/insights/article/getting-yes-high-low-patent-license-and-settlement-agreements

It suggests that parties agree on a low settlement. Key points are identified and a value is attributed to each one which then results in higher settlements through arbitration.

I wonder if this is being applied with nanoco.

The market (which we assume is right most of the time) would never attribute full market value to an assumed settlement before it is known. The view that we are priced at the settlement amount is way out.

the market will assume a discount until cash is in the bank. On that basis we know a settlement is above where we are. Even when cash is in the bank there will probably be trade at a small discount to cash.