Member Info for elrico

Oh, wait. TW has dispelled the myth of his influence in a recent bearcast, then provided a wonderful example of his own BS when he attacked me, quoting me out of context.

Waggy, the truth is the first casualty in a vendetta campaign. I cancelled my membership because I am tired of the misinformation warfare. https://lemminginvestor.substack.com/p/skinbiotherapeutics-plc-840

Pete,

I'm afraid I have to disagree with your view " If Croda comes good your still cannot have these two idiots running the company."

I'm closely monitoring the developments surrounding the Dermatonics acquisition and UMG. It's evident the latter was not included in the company/broker forecasts, possibly due to the reasons previously discussed. Despite this oversight in some quarters when the purple mist has descended, it's worth considering whether SA has been subtly signalling market insights that many have overlooked, possibly obscured by confusion or misunderstanding.

I have already voiced my concerns about the CB financing to you, our readers, and SA. While it's not my preferred method, the board's decision to proceed this way suggests they haven't disregarded investor and stakeholder interests. Instead, using CB might be a strategic move to facilitate the Dermatonics acquisition, potentially positioning the company more favourably for future endeavours.

I encourage allowing SA and MR to demonstrate the efficacy of their strategy, countering the scepticism some have shown. Let's remain open to the possibility that their approach may ultimately lead to successful outcomes. I cannot make myself clearer.

Calling them idiots is not helpful. I can assure you that it will not add a few pence to your investment. Mr Angry attempted to draw SOH into trashing the Dermatonics and UMG deals. Well, that did not go how he expected, so I guess SOH did not think SA/MR were idiots for brokering them. That's not to argue that SOH is happy with the CBs.

I accept that recent events have greatly frustrated investors, and I am not different; that cannot be denied. Let us see how the remainder of 2024 develops.

Ignore the agenda being played against SA/MR - Oh, and now myself. Think about this for a few moments!

BP, of course not. It was a hypothetical argument the sceptics might use if the exec bought meaningful tranches of shares because SBTX couldn't possibly be a good investment.

BP, there's a lot of truth in that short statement. At least this time, the exce's have a reasonable excuse for them taking their sweet time. If they manage to update the forecasts for UMG and the expansion of Dermatonics in the USA, it may well be worth the wait. Yes, the market would welcome SA/MR buys, but I do suspect it would be frowned upon if they did so in a closed period, especially if it was meaningful. However, some of the sceptics would likely argue any meaningful buying was to throw us off the scent of a profit warning. Dam!

Pete, I appreciate your perspective, and I want you to know I've shared my own views in the comments, in my reporting, and with SA, including relaying concerns others have expressed to me. My aim is straightforward: maintaining an objective mindset, as you've rightly emphasised. I tend to leave the over-the-top reactions to others, who seem to have completely overlooked the executive board's commendable achievements with the UMG deal.

You seem torn between defending SA/MR and suggesting I should at least attempt to do so. I must admit, this back-and-forth is a bit puzzling. It takes me back to my teenage years, trying to decipher the cryptic messages from someone I fancied—only to realize I was a bit of a late bloomer in making sense of it all. Make your mind up. Do you want me to defend them or not? I guess you really want me to be a TW cheerleader, bashing the execs you mention. As I have said before, it is not my role. I keep my ego in check as much as I can. I prefer to beaver away in the background, lest my fan club accuse me of allowing my ego to get the better of me.

Pomp,

"Has anybody know what TW’s latest go at our FD"

He is arguing the Dermatonics deal is a three year cash guzzler. And the UMG will add minimal revs.

.

pg, tw is not lying about the "wealth destruction" comment. i accused tw of this during a rather irate email exchange last night. he hasn't lied. however, it does appear he is stretching the truth regarding the abuse on x. he implied my readers have been encouraged to abuse him on x. it's possible i have missed them. i trawled through to 27.02.2024. not only could i not find a single interaction to any of his x posts, but i could not see any abuse via his sp account.

elrico to tom winnifrith

despite you declaring you have said your piece, you double down seemingly without a care for the wealth destruction you leave in your wake. yes, i get the ceo/cfo have greatly assisted. they have listened to complaints from you and me and acted. that's a bl**dy victory.

a promise not to use any more cbs. another victory.

you can take the financial hit that most of your readers cannot.

as for my banter, that's all it is, knowing i'm playing with a loaded deck, allowing you to make a f*cking ****** of me. no problem, it's a bit of fun. what came next from you was sadly typical of your propensity to overreact.

have your fun, i'm ok with it. i allowed myself to be set up.

Tom has always argued he does not censor people on his boards. Yet, he has censored me at least three times, the most recent being a response to: cuthbert

"Ashman and Robin have persuaded Lemming Investor that the Modi deal was not included in the Cavendish report."

My response: Manprit has given the nod – my theory was spot on. Turns out, the UMG deal didn't make it into the Cavendish report, and yes, for the very reasons I outlined during what seemed like my brief flirtation with lunacy.

Eagerly anticipating the SOH interview. Fingers crossed, it doesn't dwell overly on any schemes to topple SA and Manprit.

I should add, I really do not care if I never record another podcast with any exec. I find them terrifying, they are not natural to me and I do not have the skills to required to do justice. I am far happier with a few questions sent via email and sharing the response with a sprinkling of analytical POV.

PG,

I've been in talks with SA about bringing back our bite-sized podcasts. The NOMAD may warm up to the idea if I made them freely available. Securing a sponsor could really open the doors to making them freely available. Like any sane person, I believe in fair compensation for the hard work put in by myself and our team. You'd be surprised to learn how many hours we put into what we do. Not everyone will see the value in what we offer, and that's alright – it's all part of the diverse marketplace of products and opinions. Yesterday's events should serve as a reminder to naysayers about the potential benefits our efforts can provide to investors.

While interviewing SA directly is off the table for now, it doesn't stop me or anyone else from posing questions, provided they aren't market-sensitive. Having this platform might just grease the wheels for quicker answers. But let's be real, bombarding any exec with an avalanche of questions is bound to leave many unanswered – expecting otherwise is simply unrealistic. Even I, despite my undeniable charm, often find myself on the receiving end of silence.

I make it a point to respond to all emails, whether you're a member or not. Just make sure to include your pseudonym or real name in your email, so I know who I'm chatting with. As for Alex, good luck getting through – he's not exactly Mr. Congeniality, something Aquae can vouch for!

Don't sell yourself short, Toyin. We both called it right, as did Aquae. The only difference is I have a platform to hang myself from.

Take care freind.

Sorry, friend. :)

Al, are a unicorn in a field of donkeys – rare because you're man enough to own up to your blunders. Sure, some of your remarks might seem like you're taking a jab at me, but I take it all in stride, knowing it's all in the spirit of constructive criticism, not spite – though we can't say the same for everyone, can we?

I try to be a conduit for our investor pals, and yeah, I catch some heat for it. But hey, that's the price of sticking your neck on the block, right? And unlike my "good friend," Mr Angry, who thinks he's always right, I'm no stranger to the occasional facepalm moment. He's wrong, BTW!

But mark my words; this chubby little hobbit will soon be marching out of helms deep, friend.

I do hope I have the correct spelling this time! :)

Mad,

I'm on the cusp of confirming a pivotal detail. Should my suspicions hold, brace for a weekend read that'll serve up generous slices of humble pie to the board's most vociferous naysayers. It promises to be a delectable feast of irony, best enjoyed with a side of schadenfreude.

I appreciate the constructive critique. Sorted! :)

Al, that was a politician's answer. :)

Al, with all due respect, I'm puzzled by the approach of locking in losses over a mere six-month span, especially when the potential upside so clearly outweighs the downside risks. Letting short-term fear or impatience dictate such a pivotal decision seems both irrational and emotionally charged. I've been down that road myself in my early investing days, feeling invincible, only to learn the hard way. It reminds me of our conversations during the COVID crisis, when I faced ridicule for taking the opposite stance. That period was when I made some of my most significant investments, seizing the moment when others saw only despair. The prudent move is to buy in amidst the turmoil, or "when there's blood in the streets," as the saying goes. That is, of course, unless you've completely lost faith in the technology in Dermatonics and see Croda's potential pushed back to 2025. The convertible bond issue will resolve itself in time; why not view this turmoil as an opportunity? That would be the logical strategy, wouldn't it?

I have my answer. It will make for an interesting read.

At least, that's three of us.