RE: Funding and AGM voting6 Jun 2022 20:38
Phil, that's where good management plays a key role. Why chose to list on Nasdaq for example, without doing some DD on the investor appetite there. It wasn't a cheap exercise and cost £44m, so not exactly cash 4D could afford to lose. Going back to your point about the NASDAQ biotech besr market, again biotechs on AIM seem to be doing OK, so why did they list?
I don't think it's being as a negotiating tool, diluting your investors and using this as leverage isn't exactly a smart move. Your theory does not add up but even if i agree it still doesn't make sense, since pis lose either way.
For example 4D reject a "blackmail" attempt as you put it on the basis of a 100% placing being available, then current investors lose 50% of their holdings if exercised, yet if they accept a lower offer from a partner they keep 100% of their holding. I know which i'd go for as the difference is not going to hundreds of millions.
Voting for and risking a 100% dilution just to get a few million more in any potential partnership is insane.
They might have achieved great things in 8 years, but they've certainly not been able to reflect that in shareholder value. That has done the total opposite in the last 8 years apart from when Woodford jumped on board, Duncan had been a consistent failure in that dept.