Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
It is a bit laughable that Bonnier is blaming all the woes on an application for freezing. I think the freezing lasted a few minutes in the grand scheme. There might be other reasons for the shambles but that might be hard to admit.
I believe the £300 or so was gratefully received by the company as they handed another 3m+ shares to the directors. Well I suppose it was better than giving them away for free as the directors did the last time as they magically converted 5p warrants to freebies.
https://aaacap.com/wp-content/uploads/AAA-update-21-September-2022.pdf
https://www.techinasia.com/aaqua-swamped-layoffs-lawsuit-product-launch-delays
RNS - is that 1% of 1p per share or is it 1p?
To be fair, I did not have this chap as part of the rat pack. There are a few rats down as shareholders who are far more deserving of this. They are the blaggers, the rampers and the chancers.
I was actually wondering if it was one of the rats that got the shares for no real cost.
What were all those trades at 4 at the end of the day - was someone dumping big time or is there some other reason?
Looking at the RNS - The Court verdict is irrelevant.
No alternative argument matters.
The truth is that Apple was mentioned very much in the rumours spreading around. This was the likely reason for the spectacular rise in the AAA share price. I would have expected the directors of AAA at the time to come out and issue an announcement that they were not aware of any reasons for the substantial rise in the share price. Instead they let it ride and also sucked in a whole load of cash which I believe was was very quickly dispensed to AAQUA.
I suppose we are now left with the rumour that Sentiance is some kinda multi-billion company despite having I believe less than 30 staff and never making a profit!
We don't need an alternative argument...an alternative reality will do....and AAA is very good at that.
Candy probably looked at those Aaqua magic beans and could no longer ignore the smell and finally realised they were always just droppings from a quack.
no no no. I don't think it is not the same. That would be open market type transactions. What is suggested in the RNS is that this was part of the terms of the warrant. If so then this should have been made clear. If the director took up the warrants at 5p that would be a positive thing. What we have now is the company receiving nothing and the director receiving over 1m shares. I think the company thought this was better than the impression the market would take from the director letting the warrants lapse and effectively saying he does not feel inclined to buy any of the shares at 5p. Yeah really positive. But we are all fools I guess.
I agree. Is that even allowed?
I thought in the accounts etc. these were stated as 5p warrants and that the impression any reader would have is that the director would pay the company £100k to take them up and would receive 2m shares. The previous RNS allowing 20 more business days after accounts published would be a bit of a nonsense if he was always getting them for free in any event. Is it the case that the director was not even confident that they were worth 5p and this new convoluted arrangement was hastily put in place!
Surely I am misunderstanding this?
That RNS does that mean that the director did not have to pay for the warrants? When was decided?
Oh Yes I forgot what a business day was :)
Hopefully he will have the confidence to take them up.
As they published on 30th June does this mean he left them expire at 5p. I would have thought an RNS was required either way?
Previous RNS
The Company is planning to publish its interim results in June 2022. Consequently the Board considers that Sohail Bhatti is currently an Insider and therefore will be in a position to exercise the Warrants within 20 business days of the publication of the Interim Results should he choose to so.
oh yes...apologies...the non-compliance had me thinking it was on AIM!
Sorry I thought you meant struck-off.
I believe that after 6 months of being suspended from AIM. The Exchange will cancel the admission. This 6 months is up I think? I guess if cancelled it will then be a private company with a cloud over it in terms of compliance failures at Companies House and a risk of being struck-off if the non-compliance continues.
It will cease to exist. I am sure this is unlikely to happen.