Member Info for flundra

I don't think we need worry about the investees being hived off into a separate company without proper value being given - that would fall foul of company and insolvency law, and basically be fraudulent. Also, JM has spoken in the various interviews of the exit route being share sales and special divis, or in specie distribution to shareholders of shares in investees.

Augurs well. NY suits working on BlueNalu SPAC merger already perhaps? Oatly ca $420m revenue but loss-making (ca $60m) (2020 figs). Quite how that gives a $12bn+ valuation is a mystery to me, but I'm not complaining.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oatly-ipo-oat-milk-2021-05-20/

News reports possible Tesla factory in UK. They'll need some REs.

Some of the FCA arguments are ludicrous imo. Independent legal advice for those eligible to vote? For putting your house on the line for your husband's business debts maybe, but for voting on a SOA? Come on.

Can you really not hold the warrants in a Fidelity Investment account, alongside but outside your ISA? That would be the norm, although it looks like a problem.
I also wonder if/where the warrants will be listed, and whether tradeable?
Still worth subscribing anyway if only for the 22p shares, even if you have to waive the warrants, imo.

Anderson hoovering?

lol and agreed!

What are all those tiny trades? Looks like a weird MM code for something.

At 11:15:55!

The investment objective here is growth. It may make a profit in future, eg with a successful new project. The sale of Barruecopardo effectively wiped the slate clean, a bit like a clean break divorce, so the history of loss-making isn't really relevant now.

I suspect not, if only because the SP's held up well, which indicates existing IIs, and probably others, may hold. Some PIs lucky enough to get the new shares may well sell, and make a quick turn. Then sit on their free warrants and tail swallow for another risk-free turn down the line. Really is like finding a wad of cash on the street for them. Not for those of us with "the UK's no 1 investment platform for private investors" though.

Important to try and let HL know what we think imo, but I think we'll have to suck this one up and I can't imagine there's legal or any other redress. Ghostbusters probably are the best bet.
Broker options are simpler and cheaper than alternatives like open offers, but more limited and a bit luck of the draw as to which platforms participate. I guess HL and Peterhouse will have tried to reach an agreement in the past, but failed. Perhaps HL tried to use its size and financial muscle to push for too generous terms, which Peterhouse rejected. At least HL are unlikely to go bust, and there'll be times when they'll deliver a better deal than others. Worth having accounts with a number of providers maybe, but the hassle and cost probably isn't worth it. Although right now, I would love to have an AJ Bell account.

Where does Fortson get that 9 months figure from BTW?

9 months takes us past the likely timetable for bluenalu ipo. So even without warrant exercise funding is less of an issue going forward.

I haven't given up trying to get hold of Chris Hill yet. Not holding breath though lol

Agree GVH
Re the platforms, I fear being with the big boys like HL is really going to cost us here. There are some advantages though (I just got some free extra shares via HL in US Solar Fund's raise for example) and some of the smaller players are heavily loss making.

Danny Fortson on p6 of the biz section.
Yes GVH I also noticed he was very disparaging about Shiok which I recall is making shellfish meat with an eye on the Asian shrimp paste market. He clearly sees it as a "fold" in his "bold sold fold" categorisation.

Not overly negative and largely expected imo. The coalition will no doubt continue to try to delay and BKY will no doubt push to progress. I think concession renewal rights are now outlawed but that's too far in the future to worry about. It's an anomaly that a mainly Podemos driven amendment will be enacted at a time their vote is collapsing. Hardly a mandate.

Great post RA
Re 4/5, the warrants might have to be held outside SIPP/ISA but will presumably still be available to clients of platforms participating, lucky them. I'm stuck with the slow bureaucratic institutional "no" approach of HL.
Re 8, yes I also think he's effectively snuck the fundraising fee into the performance fee, but I'd emphasise the unique nature of essential and substantial fundraising for the first and one and only trust in a high risk pioneering sector. Who else would have taken the job on and succeeded? It wasn't even deemed possible on public markets as recently as last summer. And what's a reasonable fee, if this isn't? Don't have the answers, but I'm glad the raise has happened and at scale, and the market seems keen. Unlikely to be another raise anytime soon either, and funding discounts (and so fees) might be less severe once this gains more traction.

Probably too late for a social media campaign.
I don't know how platform/broker relationships work, but you'd think HL and Peterhouse between them could manage a limited one-off arrangement, so us PIs don't get frozen out here.

Which other brokers won't allow it?