The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Whilst ISA investments are CGT free I would caution that CGT losses in ISA investments cannot be offset against other non-ISA gains.
If you ISA invested in HUR at 20p then current losses of c12p per share cannot be utilised in offsetting non-ISA investment CGT gains.
However, if you ISA invested in HUR at 2p then your CGT gain of c6p per share will be of no interest to HMRC
I know "the market" has no memory but SP in October 2018, when the issue occurred, was c£20 - will we get back there?
FYI - Sweden's largest mine!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTgaUu6_kXA&ab_channel=ABB
Oldman.
You can view the list at the registered office, or the offices of the company's registrars - Computershare, but it would be difficult to obtain a copy.
Furthermore, the majority of private shareholdings will be amalgamated into nominee accounts which are held in the custody of brokers etc.
That, for example, Barclays have a 5% shareholding is indicative of the amount of shares they hold in their nominee accounts, and these accounts are the amalgamation of many private shareholders. The company's registrars therefore do not know details of these individual private shareholders.
To access details of individual shareholders, whose holdings are held in nominee accounts, would require an approach to the custodians of the nominee accounts.
I don't believe that anyone would be successful in obtaining any information from the custodians as to the identity of beneficial owners of the shares in a nominee account.
My original investment was based on the micro-channel FT technologies ability to address the emmissions issue from coal-fired power stations! With the passage of time I wonder if the decision to forgo this avenue of development was correct - given the vast coalfields of the UK and the current energy problems!
CA could request an exemption from the AIM market authorities to comply with the requirement to make a bid. They have a good case for an exemption.
There is nothing to prevent one shareholder holding more than 30% of shares. I cite PPS as one such example.
Any bid by CA would have to be at the minimum price they purchased HUR shares in the previous 12 months.
Did they make a purchase during that period?
CSVP - Commentaire s'il vous plaît,
Speculation on the back of a *** packet!
Shares currently issued 1,992,000,000
CA holding @ c29 % = 557,680,000
Cost of purchasing this number of shares at 8p = £46Million
Money available for purchase / capital return c£62Million
Alternatively, c£62Million could purchase CA’s holding at 11p per share
CSVP
I wonder if we will get a Director/PDMR Shareholding RNS shortly!
Okay
Tempus Fugit - Carpe Diem
Goodnight
SPADES.
"Sorry I sold out and I haven't looked at these for a while... Ive heard there is a large turnover of personnel / toxic project atmosphere and unrealistic delivery expectations. In my opinion Its unlikely this will get delivered without a placing and a minimum six month delay."
Your comment earlier this year.
Curious as to why are you here and commenting within 13 minutes?
The problem with the failure to complete the Tricoya plant is one of project management being inadequate.
This RNS indicates that in taking the lead AXS have “gripped” the situation and there should now be a very positive result at some future point.
Project management of JV’s can be very difficult, particularly when competing agendas and priorities are in place, and sub-contractors are capitalising on the situation.
Now there will be only one entity to hold to account for the success of the project; AXS‘s BoD
From the CARNS
"The share price weakness enabled the Company to take advantage by increasing its shareholding to 29% of the company. Having previously banked profits of GBP43 million on Hurricane, the average cost of the Company's current shareholding is 6.7 pence a share."
And
Timely disposal of its holdings.
"This was initially envisaged to be largely completed by the end of 2023, with the exception of GI Dynamics, which was highlighted in the February circular as being a longer-term project. However, after consultation with Shareholders, it was clear that setting December 2023 as a fixed deadline could be counterproductive and consequently the Board reiterated its focus on the best outcomes for all Shareholders."
So I guess that CA will sell HUR at plus 6.7p by December 2023 or later if in CA shareholders interest.
DYOR and speculate on the price - should keep theis BB busy for some time!
The European parliament has called to end public subsidies for the environmentally destructive practice of burning trees for fuel, but campaigners warned the plans risked being “too little, too late”.
EU limits subsidies for burning trees under renewable energy directive.
Voting on an amendment to the EU’s renewable energy directive, MEPs called to “phase down” the share of trees counted as renewable energy in EU targets. But they swerved setting any dates to reduce the burning of “primary wood”. They rejected calls for a complete phaseout of a form of energy generation that scientists have warned releases more carbon into the atmosphere than burning gas or coal.
"The flow rates to these processes are considerably lower than anticipated using nano filtration techniques resulting in significant capital and operating cost savings." - correct?
Pragmatism rears it’s head.
Sweden is relying on an old oil-fired power plant to keep the lights on in the south as a dearth of wind generation and nuclear outages sends prices to a record.
The Karlshamn station, which burns heavy fuel oil and dates back to the early 1970s, has been running fairly regularly for about a week, according to operator Uniper SE. Power prices in the southern part of a country are at an all-time high for Wednesday, soaring as much as 51% in an auction on Nord Pool ASA.
It’s the latest evidence of how combating global warming has taken a backseat as Europe faces a historic energy crisis. Burning oil is a reliable source of generating power -- but among the most polluting methods -- and adds to the rising use of coal needed to meet demand in the region.
#Offmessage
“It was to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed - by deliberately risking infection and hospitalisation you are endangering others. You have to be pretty thick not to have understood that.”
I disagree!
NHS “management” has historically claimed, each winter, that it was to be overwhelmed! Consequently, HMG pumped yet more of our taxpayer money into a wasteful exercise to aggrandise NHS management structures and facilities that, in reality, added nothing of value delivery to those requiring the services of the NHS.
The fact that the upper echelons of NHS “management” panicked on the basis of an IC computer model that proved to be “failed” during the “foot and mouth” issue of 2001 was the basis for the change of strategy in dealing with CV 19.
The DoH strategy published in 2011 for dealing with pandemics. It was well researched and in retrospect, in time, will prove to have been the correct strategy to have followed.
Albeit that the 2011 strategy was initially followed - it was the weakness of HMG, and its poor leadership, that allowed the NHS to once again “to win the emotive argument” for more funding. Funding that that was enhanced to include the building of “Nightingale facilities” none of which, despite contrary publicity, were ever used!
Future research will reveal that the whole reaction to CV19 was over reactive and unnecessary with detrimental consequences that far out-weighed the actual effect of the CV19 pandemic. That the rest of the world followed a “group think - emperor without clothes” strategy imposed by other governments demonstrates a lack of leadership and clarity in those who govern!
To accuse those of independent thought, analysis and alternative conclusion of being “pretty thick” is dangerous, and detrimental to the well-being of mankind – has history continually proves!