To be fair I was operating on the "don't get too excited" re: results in the last Investor Presentation. "I would guide you... this is last years annual accounts, don't be getting excited, nothing much to see here, it will be confirming we've integrated both business, bear in mind we only got our hands on hVIVO in January / early February last year, so we integrated the business, but the big thing in the strategy accounts for the last year we will publish is that it's firmly profitable in Q4, and being a services company, no more of this big investment, once you go profitable, you stay firmly profitable". Don't doubt that he may have said "pleasantly surprised" elsewhere, or even in the same presentation! Either way I wasn't expecting to be lol.
I've decided to top up just now at hopefully what will be the bottom. It was possible to trade in and out after going ex-div and pre results, but a bit too rich for me. GLA
RE: Looks like Invesco are trying to sell their remaining shares before the cut off tonight...15 Jun 2021 10:43
Deepjoy, apologies I understand - I must therefore add I was replying to your response to Marks analogy, not to your stated position which you have made clear in your last post.
I suspect that the market doesn't value everything appropriately (at least not initially).
I do however believe that an asset that is undeveloped and laying dormant in a company has less value than shares in a company that is developing that asset (unless one believes that company to be incompetent). It has been said that these are currently valued at £0 by the market. If you believe that the market has placed £0 value on them then going ex div wont make much difference. If you believe that the market has placed a value on this asset then the market will recognise this.
RE: Looks like Invesco are trying to sell their remaining shares before the cut off tonight...15 Jun 2021 10:19
Totally agree MarkShares, these assets have currently £0 value. And if Cathal Friel achieves his $1bn valuation for the group after all spin outs and subsequent growth then it would follow that ORPH would be somehow worth less than £0. In fact ORPHs current valuation is based on its profitable services business, these assets have no way of realising any value in the company which is why they are being spun out.
Deepjoy, the shares are not deemed worthless by the market, the asset - which is currently laying dormant in a services (not product) company is currently valued at £0 in the market. Shares in a product company that is funded and working to develop the asset do have a value.
Assword, I believe the term applies "there's no such thing as a free lunch". It's no different to assuming that you could purchase a stock before it goes ex div and sell it when it does.
RE: Cathal's slice of the Poolbeg pie15 Jun 2021 09:00
We actually won't know the final % holding of CF (nor our own) until the final share count of the newly listed company is announced. I see that currently we are working on the assumption that 2.98x ORPH shares will be added to the existing share count at PoolBeg/OP HOLDCO 2021 LIMITED. When this company lists it will announce how many shares are in issue.
In addition to this Cathal Friel has stated in recent presentations that the Immune Supressor Modulator company will require funding ("keep an eye on your Primary Bid accounts") and this will create further dilution to his and our own holdings.
I'm not really convinced of an ORPH RTO here, CF in a recent presentation stated that he wanted to use a clean listing and hand over something like 95% of the share count directly to ORPH holders. The share structure of this SPAC doesn't really suit the above criteria - if it did, it would mean massive dilution and wouldn't bring a good return to current holders of SPC.
FWIW I'm not particular sold on the idea of a massive screwup having taken place either, nor read through that withdrawing an application for listing on the AQSE Growth Market reflects on the ability of Peter Jay to bring a good deal in.
Does seem strange, not sure why they applied or withdrew in the end. Also their RNS come out at weird times. A little bit of excitement for a while! Now back to where we were a couple of weeks ago playing the waiting game.
The regulatory threat has been acknowledged in every annual report from 2016 onwards. That's not to say the political landscape and sentiment hasn't shifted, but surely would be priced in by now after 5 years.
Also the new weekly Lifestyle competition less contentiously fits the model of a "Prize competition" according to the gambling commission - offering diversification from the spot the ball model.
Under AIM Rule 26 websites only need to be updated every 6 months, so I wouldn't expect to see anything change on there now. However it does also state that they should provide the identity and percentage holdings of its significant shareholders (over 3%). If the shares are held in nominee accounts then this may be sufficient to meet the criteria of AIM websites (I’m no legal expert tho!)
TR-1s will be more specific and timely, so if something (notifiable) has changed it would need to be filed within a certain time limits (ie shareholder notifies issuer[of the shares] within 2 trading days and they have to notify the FCA the next day)
As for Raglans stake, the TR-1 showing 4.53% (83,927,629) matches the amount held by Pershing Nominees Limited so I assumed that’s where they were held.
Yes it would make sense for them to be selling, as that would be a logical investment decision. If they participated in the placing at GBP0.001975 then anything between that and GBP0.003 represents a fantastic return as well as recouping the initial investment. I'd expect the price during this period to drift between the placing price and the warrant price (due to supply and demand/rumours). If the share price does shoot up as news emerges they have the option to subscribe at GBP0.003. So they're not missing out on any potential massive gains! They just don't need to run the risk of losing 50% or indeed all of their initial investment.
I can't imagine anyone serious about making (or keeping hold of) their money would go about it any other way - it's much harder to make money if you don't have any. I guess there are scenarios where they are more or less confident of a deal - maybe they'll hold once they've made back their initial investment for a free-roll, but nothing is certain and it's not really a risk they need to take.
Hi, I've spent the last couple of days routing around online trying to find a good description or case study of what happens in the event of an RTO, I can't seem to find any good resources, can anyone point me in the right direction, or share their own experience/knowledge? (and even hopes/scenarios for this particular case). Thank you
Buy at :- 86.65p - 04/01/2021 After the pullback :- 122.40p - 12/03/2021 & 114.35p - 25/03/2021
The same £ value of buy each time, I was going to go more on the last purchase but I thought it was going to touch 1.11 for another opportunity (which it did) - but in the end I didn't buy again as SLP now sits at 18% of my PF. Also hold 6.4% of my PF in Tharisa (THS) - So probably overweight in this area in general.
Wondering if it's better not to look to be honest. I've held since November (after the rise). Since then it's been trading in a range and fairly large 2-3 day moves have been the norm. I've bought at every bottom since then, but don't really feel comfortable trading in and out of the share as I'm sure I'll sell on the day Boris mandates cruises for all over 50s (within a 5 mile radius).