Member Info for dougb189

lol., sorry bud, but check out Chris Aker's tweets over the past weekend & tie it into today's movers...

Erm., what 'proceedings' in this thread, are you envisaging bud, that currently entails peeps eagerly trusting in Abman's investment advice ?? Thread opened with the possibility that Amit invested �0.5M of his own, someone then suggested that it was nowt more than bs, originating from Abman.... And now we have the suggestion, that the thread proceedings is somehow that peeps are all eagerly awaiting investment advice... '..havent people FINALLY wised up...'. ??? Do these alleged 'proceedings' involve copious quantities of...... gin ? It appears that Abman gets mentioned in despatches (& not a very creditable one at that) which then results in some peeps having convulsions.... Just saying.

Rk., was Mr.Selfridge instrumental in promoting said calendar ? .... no. a subtle difference between being caught in the excitement, & with being instrumental in that excitement. I've known Mr.S a while & he's a good guy in my book, a wee bit excitable but aint we all. 'propensity' was referring to the natural tendency of the afore-mentioned gentlemen, to revert quickly & easily to salesmen. And quietly alluding to all the weaknesses that encompasses. '..aren't you a bit suspicious that Lange didn't speak..' suspicious of course, but not totally surprised, as i had suggested, prior to last week.

I see this play’s previous main protagonist (suggestion then, was he’d be offered a seat on the rlh board) has been advocating another wee RTO over the weekend & which could possibly bear fruition a few weeks earlier than this play..

"...that was a terrible scam of getting peoples money if the truth be known..." just take careful note of who was involved in that.. & of Mr.Etheridge's (very similar to Abman's) propensity, & their needs for quoting CEO's alleged intentions. Some peeps will deduce fraudulent behaviours, others will deduce just weak characters. Again & again, both are way too close to the coal-face, whilst totally failing in & not realising its the AIM pit-face. Try not worry too much 'bout the 'apparent' lack of updates.. i've said it before... & 'underground', it is. Some peeps never listen, c'est l'vie. Whoop whoop & lets hope this week is again as exciting as last week. time to indulge in a Costa breakfast.

interesting exercise following another aim shell ORE , taking over an online retailer Threads35 with a couple of well respected fashion mag editors, setting up a niche product for the maturer ladiez, with new name SOS initial shell, mc �4.5M at 1.7p x 260M OS'ish then converted to a 10 for 1, raising c.�8M cash (inclusive from some interesting players) with the opening price 18.75p & mc c.�20M x 107M OS'ish *** interesting exercise, when looking for : (1) RTO's (2) how the market values inclusive of cash reserves & (3) any hint of possible similarities to ASOS / established players (4) the timelines involved, in this case almost the full 6 months permitted, for what appears to be an amiable RTO, with retaining of some management. does look very much like it will be a standard c.2 years prior to any online market share, which perhaps explains the low return. ***....giving shareholders c.25% holding in new set up....*

I tend to fall back & use Zwartkops 24th August excellent find, as a guidance, in where the operators are almost desperate for a JV. Hopefully some hard hitting accountants will convince them of a disposal. Kinda then suggests, there might be a quick turn-over, ie. 'the offer is on the table, take it or leave it'. 6 months would perhaps suggest procrastinated deals. ImLo.

Hi Iain, i was thinking that 1p was perhaps just a wee bit on the conservative side : it seems a low figure, when the Directors holdings are again taken into account, specifically those of their most experienced miner (who's experience will no doubt see him play a pivotal role?). At 1p then a return of �150k for that miner's current 15M holdings/efforts when spread over the last 6 months, seems a bit.... lack-lustre. which puts us possibly into options packages... using previous example of 7.5% for existing shareholders (inclusive of bod's 0.75%) then round it up to 10% being allocated, of which the bod are allocated 4.25%, of say an mc �200M, which then gives a more reasonable figure of �8.5M for the directors efforts ? & then left wondering if perhaps there is an equation, that requires a slightly larger figure than 7.5% as a 'free-float' ? i.e.. would it be more beneficial to the ii's that do get involved, if the stock had a wee bit more volatility, with a larger free-float, with some RTO's of c.25% allocations being previously heard of.. he he. 1p for me, would be very good bud.

0.4p....... 1.5B existing OS x0.4p = �6M, of which the directors hold 10%, so c.�600k split between 4 directors and soon you're talking... c.peanuts kinda suggests, its hardly worth getting up for ? Cynical's 1p would make a nice round starting figure ; 1.5B OS = �15M, so directors now sat with c�1.5M throw in a few packaged options, and at which point, they may decide the prospects look sunny. �200M (nominal $180M + say $70M costs) at 1p puts 20B OS in circulation, giving the current holders 7.5% (some RTOs have been known to go higher). 20B then consolidated to 2B perhaps, at 10p, then makes a nice round figure, for the ii's ? 1p or 0.4p, should be an interesting exercise for all.

Compliments on your Nigeria play. watched from the sidelines for a few months & is i will wait till mid-October. you do seem to attract some of the more sociopathic residents of LSE, which i think may in part be down to your oft shouted '10 bagger'. it takes diligence to spot the more sincere residents, & it again takes a wee bit more to spot when those estimations are just slightly on the top-heavy side.... 'triple-baggers' are good bud. i did seriously think that Toby might have taken this in the same direction !

was always a risk waiting for the expected drop prior to 28th, but that news would have floored it. on receipt, they then had 3 trading days in which to put into print. nicely played & for me, still puts the last directors purchase prices mid 0.3's as a reference level.... it shows that the bod are very much committed.

lol, there is loose, and there is Very loose paperwork. looks like UKgov.com's lack of any commitments to Any regulations, has now seen Spreadex go down with a wee dose of Mad Cow Disease.. somebody got spooked with Mr.Akers going..... (he he he, to the car auctions, I'm guessing).

..prrrrrr..Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz's....prrrrrrr..Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz's......... lol fingers crossed bud

A wee bit diversity in approach maybe, but let the dust settle here & perhaps just switch off : Cynical's 1p scenario is quite plausible, and it keeps this nicely under the radar. Yes, there are some RTOs that go to 25% allocations for the original shareholders, but the metrics in arguing that scenario, would be inclusive of what our bod bring to the table, and of just how much capital Sloane hope to raise. 1p is comfortable. In the lap of the Gods, so to speak. Energies may be better put to use in putting your spare funds into looking around for other stocks : Mr.Akers recouped the best part of £1.5M inclusive of his initial £625k outlays. The morning of the huge sells, then saw the MMs getting disorientated, The outcome of which was their immeadiate 70% premium on Zero shares traded, in one of Mr.Akers stocks. This quickly retreated when it was then seen that all that was contributed was a rather lowly £10k. No other director buys of note, so appears Mr.Akers is still sitting with a cool c.£1.5M (less the £10k 'invested').. All week scratching ma heed, and the best I could come up with... it is auction season, For car enthusiasts.... Lucky sod.

re Cynical Bear's concerns : 1. TR1's in AIM have always been pretty loose; we all have experience of the 'forward selling' a week or more ahead of notification dates, soooooo.... if the Big Boys can play loose on large scales, then what is to stop the wee PI from also incorporating a loose approach to sending off his paperwork ? And, of course, those darn TR1 forms, always come out corrupted from the Mac's.... For the Institutional investors, then they simply are not obligated to notify, when their holdings are <5%. If we recognise those failings, then we can still make broad estimates of holds/sells with the instruments available L2, etc. Spreadex responsibilities with their paperwork, is covered when issuing the original TR1, in this case at 17%. as the warrants were being issued, then that figure will now be closer to 12%. again, it is loose paperwork (from the Company) but the Pi can still do the sums... 2. nice figures with an OS of 1p. i did this with a placing for $180M or c.£150M, which then put 90% in hands of the creditors, but then entailed lots of CLNs (+ their warrants) for operational costs. my fingers are crossed for Cynical's calcs. 3. The directors do not have about 1% each, the directors Together hold c.165M OS, i.e..10%+ so the encouragement is, in the individual qualities of those directors And their combined commitments.. way tooooo cynical. lol

Good call bud. did think that Toby may have opted for something 'closer to home', nearer to the the Orroro, and i'm still thinking there's deep-water opportunities close to there.. Hat-trick for you ? lol

lol, when peeps start singing 'choo choo' then invariably its time to leave the station.. on Shank's pony still tickled by '"..its..a..shell.." but hey... the trades don't lie ?!