Member Info for Feeks

Troublesome, how on earth did you get that impression? My views completely changed as a result of the Samsung litigation settlement, and the dubious RNS which preceded it. I feel vindicated in not allowing myself to trust the Board since that time. In my view PI's were badly misled - that much is plain to see - and that nothing good would ever come with sticking with the current incumbents. I don't think there is any "business" here worthy of an investment. I have never credited Nige with a sensible opinion as he doesn't have one. He's just dangerously full of bluster, and contrarian to the point of stupidity. There are many sensible voices on this board, who are both for an against the investment case, but the truth is all of you would be better off looking at other tech companies with hopes; not this one.

To be sure, there is no sensible reason to invest. The cash on the balance sheet is not enough.

What...!? You say AOP is not taking on the risk of non-payment of the milestone?

So with all that in mimd what is attracting you all to remain imvested....?

Well so it is, Henry. I stand to be corrected. My French is of the mangled kind.

NGR I don't agree with you but I am always impressed by the manner and style of your posting. I really do think this company is on a long road to nowhere but still, I hope it works out for you in the end.

Bon chance!

There could be a slight retrace, but back to 19-20p ....? You are having a laugh.

It is what it is. On the plus side, there is some kind of transparency at last in regard to there being virtully 'nil' current prospects. On the downside, since investing is the name of the game, one may legitimately ask what reason is there to invest in a dwindling cash pile except for blind faith and hope....? It is like being tied in as a non-preferrential angel investor and that to me isn't very attractive.

Officially, kitchen designer and amateur twitcher. You posted it.

"Honestly I don't think I've ever seen such an over-reaction to news"

You heard it right folks.

Words uttered by the same kitchen guy who was telling us all pre-Samsung settlement that the market is ALWAYS right and that only arrogant fools would ignore this. But this time around 'you know who' knows better.

The "investment" here is an R&D company with long term "potential". It is a huge gamble. It is purely a punt on whether £20m provides a long enough runway for something to turn up. That is literally it. I've been playing that same record for over 2 years already and there won't be any change anytime soon. I am willing to bet they would not be willing to pay all these staff costs if money was tighter but for now it all adds to the show.

Please let no-one here take seriously this piece of utterly cretinous investment advice as it is bad for your wealth:

"If the company was concerned it would cancel the buyback"

Yes, I am for real.I used to you be a member of a private investment club in which there was a high level of consensus that buy backs are invariably bad for investors. They can be positive but rarely so. In the case of this company , it is not reason for good cheer as today's RNS proves

Buybacks are an awful omen. Rarely is it a good sign. It tells me there is no current business. The only silver lining in the aftermath of today's RNS is that you are still holding.

Yes, and it is awful. This company has not found a productive business model. It did have some very valuable IP anf it was sold for a song. Sorry to say it but you've all been had.

Yes, and it is awful. This company has not found a productive business model. It did have some very valuable IP anf it was sold for a song. Sorry to say it but you've all been had.

He was presumably repossessed by the Bank

" I'm the one with no mortgage."

Sorry about my last post which was horribly "clickbaity". I'll tell you next week after I've bought a few more shares! Maybe I'll work on doing a proper summary of it too for those who want to look further

Ddubya, if you care to delve back into FWits posting history (I do not ever wish to do that, but I do recall the gist) you will seem him admit to having been involved in several private litigation disputes in court (which certainly rings true). He says that in one of those cases he spent the sort of money on lawyers that could have bought a house.

Has Zak Mir ever been right, even just once?