Member Info for Hexam

"All I know is as a LTH there's everything to gain and nothing to lose."

That's a really stupid comment on ANY share let alone a penny AIM stock with no revenue. Priceless.

"What I believe he said CW was that 80% of the people who post here are short on Boo."

Which is what I said but you claimed he said nothing of the sort. Odd.

So I know I'm not short, nor is FED, nor you, nor was Neil, nor Reardon, nor Fatman, nor The Northern. That's seven minimum (and I could throw Kachra and a few others in too). For 80% of posters here to be short would mean 28 posters and you are saying that is an understatement. Care to list the people (more than 28) you believe are short on here then? Just nonsense.

"For example, how many jumped on and supported Southcoast's inane claim, repeated literally hundreds of times that suspension was "nailed on" by last Friday"

I don't think many did and some of us openly disagreed with it. And I think you've referred to this now at least twenty or maybe thirty times? I think it was this kind of spamming that got Neil into hot water so perhaps it's time you found another thing to harp on about endlessly? (And it wasn't 'literally hundreds'. Tut, tut.)

I was thinking more of things like his talk of his AI model that said 80% of posters were short or something like that. Obviously crazy talk which made him an easy decision to filter.

Yes, the majority of comments on here are negative but that is hardly surprising given the huge losses of the company, repeated scandals, the radio silence, clear contempt for shareholders and the 95%+ destruction of the share price. Most of the criticism seems well founded in my view. What I find incredible is that there are still some here talking this shower up so much and defending it so eagerly and persistently.

"Hexam, I'm surprised you haven't filtered Bfd in that case.."

I would do but he comes across as more believable as he talks with confidence about things he knows absolutely nothing about so is more a 'danger' to anybody new to this board. Whereas Neil wouldn't be believed by even the greenest of newbies and the sheer volume of his (repeated) posts alone was just so irritating.

"However my point is he said nothing offensive or nothing that wasn't largely true."

Crap - just about everything he said was nonsense and he said it over and over again which is why I filtered him. Glad I don't have a board covered in green anymore.

Yes Daffy, that would change the picture dramatically but it's been very quiet on that front for quite a while now and I certainly can't see anybody lending with that as any kind of security.

AWL - Their rate of spend over the last few years has been pretty consistent (around £1.5m a year) so UNLESS this changes significantly I agree that late Q1 next year is around the time a next raise will be needed - and not before.

I don't think they would be able to raise anything like £10m either by equity raise (given the current mcap) or by borrowing (as they have no meaningful assets to borrow against or no revenue - at the moment).

If any projects need that kind of funding then their best bet is probably to get a partner who believes in what they are doing and the potential revenue it can generate to fund most or all of it. So long as they were convinced they would get a decent return on their investment this shouldn't be an issue. Another option is to simply just sell the IP or even the company.

If much lower sums are needed though then they could potentially raise these if they could convince backers with the kind of evidence that the methods work that they haven't yet shared with us shareholders.

“One big fat scam worthy of a netflix documentary”

Wouldn’t argue with that 😁

“The problem is they have admitted the loan and gave no further comment....”

If that’s the case then it makes it a whole lot trickier though the loan itself is less the issue compared with how it was being ‘paid back’.

“I guess that is why you work in finance not Comms Hexam”.

Actually I did write (and proof-read) comms as well.

But tell me what would be the problem with writing a one line denial if there was no truth to it?

I don’t see anything complex in putting out a simple denial (if it is not true). No lawyers needed really for that. Easy to put out a holding letter too if there is some truth to it.

Didn't they reply 7am the next day to the letter in October?

"At least Hexam had the balls to admit he is trading and blows hot and cold with his position."

Yet another lie from you Jambone. I have never 'blown hot' on QBT. I do say the odd positive thing but I say those things regardless of my position. I currently have the most invested in QBT that I have ever had but the only positive thing I can say about them at the moment is that they should have funding to last into next year. I do not believe for one second there will be a deal after summer - or ever come to that. That won't stop FG raising again in the future though and pumping the sp with more 'progress' before he does (and is why I am invested).

Btw the regarding your statement "I honestly don’t think you understand, especially with the chip manufacturers how impressive QBT must have been, as the time money and effort to include QBT methods shows how great they believe QBT method C to be" I am sure everybody here would love to know which manufacturers you are talking about and how much money they have spent so far to include QBT methods - or this yet more stuff you've made up that you are presenting as fact?

If it's a right issue then everybody gets the right to buy more shares in proportion to their existing holding and so if they take up their full rights their share is unchanged. If you are talking about the last equity raise then that wasn't a rights issue but a placing. Although there was a small retail part to that it was mainly for the big boys and so our share did reduce.

The mandatory offer rules are very explicit and the minimum offer is set at the price paid by the potential buyer over the last twelve months not the price generally paid. Here is the actual wording:

"An offer made under Rule 9 must, in respect of each class of share capital involved, be in cash or be accompanied by a cash alternative at not less than the highest price paid by the offeror or any person acting in concert with it for any interest in shares of that class during the 12 months prior to the announcement of that offer."

I think they would have done that already if they were at all interested.

Kachra,

I don't think Frasers ever paid more than about 35p so that would be around the minimum offer. Even so I agree that he probably wouldn't like to go that high on a bid with the sp being so low and the financials so bad - let alone factoring in all the other stuff.

Any rights issue wouldn't force him over the 30% threshold though. Even if Frasers took up all their rights the percentage would just stay the same and if they didn't (i.e. they sold some or all of their rights instead) then the percentage would go down.

It could easily be a problem in the audit that is holding the results up (query over asset values, potential dodgy dealings, wording of going concern statement etc.) but it could easily be something else delaying their publication 'good' or bad' (major capital transaction, suppressing poor news, holding out as long as possible for good news to soften the results etc.).

Nobody knows and so it is just speculation. One thing that might come out of Frasers action over this latest whiff of scandal though is that it might at last prompt something meaningful from the BOD as what surely can't be disputed is that the silence from them for so long whilst the sp continues to plummet is itself scandalous and inexcusable (including that of hiding behind a marathon close period).

"you don't have any intention of QBT to be successful"

I think you have the wrong word there as there is nothing I can do which will make QBT successful or not so 'intention' doesn't come into it. Perhaps you meant I don't have any 'wish for' QBT to be successful but that wouldn't be true. I hold enough shares to be celebrating in extravagant style if this long shot does comes off - I just don't believe it will. Instead, for me, the value is just in trading the regular ups and downs but if the miracle does happen then that would be the ideal outcome and the certainly the most profitable one for me. So here's to the deal arriving before Christmas!

"Can you please just use the one log-in Tradey? It's getting boring."

You could always filter one of them so that you only get one set of trash. Works for me :-)