We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
"A lot of the big global money left the UK after Brexit, and more recently, caused by investor worries during/after covid, inflation and rising interest rates, staffing shortages, etc. "
And the 'elephant in the room', the WORST, most inept government in living memory
"No. One can be mistaken for company news and encourage click through links to find mention of MSC or Morocco or emulsion fuels. The other can't. There's a difference."
Yes, the difference being one was about biofuels used in rail transport, a potential market for QED, the other was a meaningless anecdote about working in a petrol station
"We all have access to Google. This stuff just clogs up the board"
You're kidding right?
"I, in fact, used to work the night shift at a shell garage while at uni. Got a gas bottle thrown through the plate glass. Good times."
I've just sent a twitter message to the UK Climate minister (also Energy Security and Net Zero) making him aware of Quadrise and BioMSAR Zero
I don't really expect a reply, but you'd think that a government on the ropes would be looking for some good news anywhere?
"Who's fault is it that? It's the fickle PI's own fault, that's who"
Well I've read some nonsense on this BB over the years, but congratulations for the most inane statement ever. You're actually blaming the lack of take up on PI's? If the company had structured it right it would have been better received. We PI's don't get the benefit of the presentation made to II's, we have to make the decision based on what's in the public domain, no winks and nudges for us. And then we have to choose to subscribe even though we could buy cheaper at the click of a mouse. To even suggest that the fund raise wasn't successful was because of fickle PI's is simply laughable
Many on here think you're a fool, but you've now proved it to the rest of us
"they had their chance of cheap stock and many blew the chance, as such they should not be given a second chance"
But they weren't cheap, you could actually buy for less on the open market. PI's shunned the offer because there was no incentive to buy directly from the company. It was poorly packaged, there should have been some incentives added such as warrants, hence why it was not very well supported
Hf14 "It must be very frustrating for MSC as they have been ready to start this trial for a number of months."
How do you know that? The last information we had was that the trials are expected to commence in Q1 2024 provided the relevant permits are received in time. Have all the permits been issued?
Hf14 "If they do the costs of an open offer will be more than the proceeds. They only had 38% last time and that included excess shares taken up."
I believe they structured the offer wrongly last time, there was no incentive to buy shares through the offer than on the open market, (other than directly supporting the company). I'm sure the take up would have been much higher if they'd attached some meaningful warrants. If they need to raise again, I hope they've learned a few lessons and will structure it in a way that is more attractive to existing holders
Pigfase "Theirs always a few who try to put other down ,as i suffer from dyslexia sometimes get sentences wrong. "
I think it's short term memory loss, as you seem to have forgotten all the snidey posts you make about the LTH's here. Funny how the ones having a pop, cry foul when it's directed back at them. Actually no, not funny, PATHETIC π
"I'm as qualified as you Fyoz"
Undeniably, but I'm not advising people to wait for an RNS
"here's my brass neck - I have the margin to make that choice and the right to post here!"
Undeniable again, but I asked you if you think you're qualified to advise potential investors, which you're clearly not