Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. Watch the video here.
“Prax is currently in a number of other acquisition processes for upstream assets.”
Where does it say “close to buying at least 2 producing assets”
Fantasy.
"Prax are close to buying at least 2 producing assets to use the HUR tax credits. "
Is this public knowledge? If it is were has it been published?
Is it insider knowledge in which case see posting rule 5 b.
Or is it speculative rubbish.
fandg2
I place no faith in anything Kever says. He makes it up as he goes along, and I very much doubt he is talking to RB. If RB is talking to other shareholders he needs to be careful what he says because the takeover rules still apply and the Court could reject the deal if it is found the rules have been broken.
machin
"While I disagree profoundly with Kever's position, I respect it."
Do we know really know what Kever's position is? . Previously he was against the deal.
I have zero respect and I disregard everything he has to say. He is abusive and provocative and makes claims which if true can only be based on insider knowledge. I see his original 14p offer post has been taken down.
This is from the Times today:
“Ministers have been urged by MPs, economists and motoring groups to rethink plans to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars by 2030.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ditch-unrealistic-pledge-to-ban-petrol-cars-by-2030-ministers-told-hhgfck8zg
From the posting rules:
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Someone has admitted to being a liar.
Do not hesitate to report any posts which are in breach of the rules.
everhopeful
"Cap gains on Share profits should be a sliding scale the longer you are in the less you pay."
There used to be Taper Relief which did exactly this but the tax rate was also higher. It was abolished in 2008 and the tax rate was reduced.
It is quite obvious that Management are concerned the deal could fail. Why else have they gone to the trouble of the presentation meeting and Q&A and why were yesterdays RNS’s declaring Prax will not improve their offer.
Maris claims that the only alternative is an orderly wind down, but is it? Bernstein may not be happy if the deal fails but he has to be pragmatic. Will he accept the orderly wind down or look for an alternative?
RodneyT
HUR have given up the licences for Warwick Lincoln and Halifax. The only licence they still hold is Lancaster and yet on the Company website they still have the nerve to declare:
"Hurricane’s strategy is to create shareholder value through monetising the reserves and resources associated with naturally fractured basement reservoirs within its portfolio."
It would be a good joke if it wasn’t so sad.
No idea why HUR have written to the HMRC.
If you don’t know why you must be an idiot.
Are HL feeding me duff info ?
Yes.
So why have HUR written to HMRC for a definitive answer?
"I have it in writing from HL that DCU payments are free of tax in a SIPP. That is good enough for me."
Of course they will be tax free just as any other dividends and gains made in a SIPP are tax free, BUT will you be able to keep your DCU’s in a SIPP or in an ISA long enough to receive any future dividends and gains. That is the question which has yet to be answered and if the answer is no what will happen. As I see it providers will have to sell all SIPP and ISA held DCU’s within 30 days Please correct me if anyone knows better but as far as I am aware investments held in SIPP’s and or ISA’s cannot be transferred to the beneficial owner so they have to be sold. There will then be a mass sale of the DCU’s by all the providers and how is that going to affect their value? Investors will get a pittance and nothing like the potential returns promised. And Maris and Chaffe won’t give a damm.
I agree.
CRS holders have a vested interest in seeing this deal go ahead, and there is one particular poster who claims he holds CRS and has sold out of HUR.
JBiddy
Do you assume that everyone who posts is genuine and truthful?
Oldman45
“Under note 3. on the proxy form it states that voters need to be on the Register of Members. I'm not sure we will be if our shares are held in nominee accounts such as HL.”
The voting member is the nominee Company who hold “your” shares in their name. You instruct your provider on how you wish to vote in respect of “your” shares and their nominee Company will then vote in accordance with your instructions.
I have instructed my provider, HSD to vote No.
Ian -c and ronwoking
Regardless of how Morrowsodali obtained your phone numbers they must have had a reason for contacting you. Did they ask how you intended to vote or try to persuade you?
It’s not just the lack of guidance. What it signifies is a total lack of regard for the interests of all PI’s who hold their shares in ISA’s, and or SIPP’s. Consider the consequences if the DCU’s are not accepted as qualifying investments. If this happens providers will be obliged to sell them within the 30 day limit for holding non qualifying investments. PI’s will have no choice. The mass sale will depress the price and investors will get a tiny fraction of the potential return. This deal has been made to suit the needs of CA and keep Maris and Chaffe on their fat cat salaries.
If the odds of getting the 6.48p are good then why is so much emphasis placed on the risk of production failure?
dflynch
"From a practical standpoint it would NOT be a good strategy to develop the case on a public bulletin board so I would suggest that all correspondence on the matter be conducted by private e-mail. This may be difficult, as I for one would not wish my e-mail address to be published."
Wise advice.
For all those who are serious about this rip off of PI's it is worth taking up premium membership, if only temporarily for one month. Personal contact details can be exchanged using the private messaging facility and it might also be worthwhile creating a separate private forum. Someone will have to take the lead in doing this. In my personal opinion those wishing to challenge the matter in Court need a barrister to represent them, which will mean having to first instruct a solicitor. Agreement will be needed on how to fund it.
Nobby
Did you read this paragraph from the RNS:
"JOG remains well funded for its on-going and planned work programmes, with a cash balance of approximately £6.5 million as at 31 December 2022. It is intended that the cash payments anticipated to be received from NEO following completion of the transaction will be utilised to pursue the Company's stated growth strategy and provide additional working capital for the Company."
I'm pretty sure this was not an idle comment and was intended specifically to ally any concerns of an imminent fundraise.
You are either plain lazy or your motives are questionable.