The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Matched bargain basis.
You have to have a willing Buyer and a willing Seller, an agreed number of DCU's, and an agreed price between them.
Unlike traded shares, were the transaction is between the Seller or Buyer and the Market maker who takes the risk of being able to find a counter-party.
You might as well try to sell them on eBay, the purchaser relying on the ebay guarantee - now there's a thought!
Kever. Congratulsations on your reading achievements, but no need to confirm that which we had already gathered from your contributions.
Ahh! Another one.
If the cap fits - wear it!
Kind and helpful to the last!
So! One more day to trade this share.
What will be the final price when it ceases trading?
"Complete and utter tosh. Your broker is 100% wrong."
Pot kettle and black springs to mind!
:-)
But only 6.02p - anything else is pure future speculation. :-)
Whilst he was in the military he enjoyed the life, he had a pretty good reputation amongst the soldiers. He also had the prospect of enjoying a future life were he could maintain his military connections. Furthermore, he was not short of attractive single women with whom he could share his life.
But like many who have served in combat, the stress can manifest itself at PTSD with, in the worst cases, dark and suicidal thoughts and actions occurring. Perhaps that is what caused him to be caught in the dark web he now finds himelf entangled with.
He may be rehabilitated in the future, but he will have to wrest him self free of the darker parts of his past life if he is to succeed and return to what he was.
That 6.48p could be 0.0p according to PRAX so you can only be sure of getting 6.02p for spending 7.7p.
Don't forget PRAX are only paying 0.83 of their money for HURR - the rest belongs to HURR
Incorrect - but consistent!
If anyone else wishes to e-mail the Judge they should send their e-mail direct to his clerk at the following e-mail address.
supriya.saleem@justice.gov.uk
I also thought it might also be helpful to let other contributors know what I e-mailed to the Judge.
Your Honour,
I am a Hurricane Energy shareholder holding 250,000 shares in a nominee trading account with Interactive Investors. I am thus a beneficial holder of shares rather than someone listed on the share register.
I would like to register my strong opposition to the Scheme of Arrangement proposed by Hurricane Energy and before the court for sanction on 7 June. Many, like myself, believe the scheme to be both unjust and inequitable and has been promoted to the detriment of individual shareholders like me. Specifically, it disadvantages those with shares held in nominee accounts such as mine after being prevented from voting at the Court Meeting on 4 May.
The company is in a sound financial position with no debt and significant assets. But under pressure from its largest shareholder, it embarked on an unnecessary and opaque sales process. The resulting inadequate and highly complex Scheme places all the risk with shareholders and little or none with PRAX (as its the Company’s own money that is used for the initial stages of the sale). The scheme may also result in significant tax liabilities for those individuals who currently hold shares in ISAs and SIPPs, assuming payments from DCUs are actually forthcoming.
Moreover, it is worth noting that the company has previous history in putting before the Courts a deeply flawed and inadequate restructuring plan that was declined by His Honour Judge Zacaroli.
I would urge that Scheme of Arrangement is not sanctioned.
Signed……….
Well tomorrow is the final day in this long sorry sad saga in which many investors who supported the company in its attempt to produce a new source of secure energy for the UK are finlly scammed, and kicked in the face for this support.
They have been badly served by the various members of the BoD, particularly most recently.
It was never necessary to put HURR up for sale! If Crystal Amber wanted out then fine – they could have sold their shares on the open market, as did many small investors who could not risk more awaiting the rewards of their investment. Rewards that are well in sight – why else would PRAX scam investors with their ludicrous below value offer, if they could not also see them.
What is the biggest obscenity in the whole matter is the thousands of small investors in HURR who were disenfranchised from participating in HURR’s future, at the crucial Court meeting on the 4th of May.
Many will have thought that they were voting against the PRAX Scheme. They were not, their voting efforts were ignored, because their shares were held in nominee accounts (SIPP, ISA, Trading) by their brokers. Any protesting voices went unheard!
I have emailed the Court to acquaint the Judge with my concerns as to what is happening and requesting, that like their colleague Mr Justice Zacaroli, that the Court do not sanction this despicable unfair Scheme. A Scheme that is only before the Court because of the unjust way it grossly disadvantaged investors; investors who went unheard at the decisive Court meeting in May.
:-) Caught one!
1010: The 6.48p will be paid in full
1752: This means the 6.48p payout is more or less guaranteed.
Even you Kever are now begining to draw back on the certainty of PRAX paying out!
Wobbly head falling off - realistic head taking over perhaps?
If PRAX will have 2 producing wells by summer then why couldn't HURR. And if PRAX buy more wells why don't they pay out the full amount at the outset for HURR ,or will a scam be in the air?
If it happens then it will speculatively prove that we have been scammed by the BoD, or the BoD were incompotent as widely believed. or acted in bad faith, a strong possibility, when recommending the deal to shareholders. These will be the sentiments that could be circulating then.
absolutely correct - and unfortunately, i have little faith in the integrity of the less than transparent prax.
how do people think they secretively got to where they are today?
the media have reported that prax is a $10 billion crude oil empire, grown by a married couple from a flat in surrey. it is not a pharmaceutical company that has discovered a miraculous drug, like penicillin, and grown from that success.
the guardian reported, last year, that the company’s profits have soared almost tenfold between 2010 and 2020! it has to be acknowledged, that on the face of it, it is an extraordinary achievement.
the report continued “information on how this flat-based business grew into the colossus it is today is somewhat sp****, prompting questions over whether a closer scrutiny is required…”
it has been suggested elsewhere, that a good accountant can make 2 + 2 equal any figure his employer requires. so, for the next year prax want hurr’s financial performance to be abysmal – and don’t forget they are no longer accountable to the scammed shareholders. what do you think they will do – even if it doesn’t include present elements of the malfunctioning hurr board of directors directing the finances?
if their intentions were genuine, it would be reasonable to expect them to cough up the 12.5p at the outset – they haven’t. they are returning the money that already belongs to hurr shareholders and walking off with their money producing assets.
form your own opinions and make your decisions – but you can’t say that there were no warnings.
Walt - you don't know my world, so I suggest you toddle off back to yours in the playground and play with the other little girls. I am sure they are highly desirous of your common sense, wisdom and imagination.
BORING! The only definite good thing to come out of this deal is the cessation of your blathering” There must be many here looking forward to the demise of your WALT fantasising persona.
Utrinque Paratus - indeed!
Is that definite?
What about the rest - is that also definite?
Time will tell, :-)
"Do we just receive the payments automatically via a DCU Share register that Prax maintain for the next three years ?"
Well ,if they avoid payment it shouldn't be an administrative problem that they have too deal with, I would have thought.