We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
540p?! That's just completely unjustified mega-ramping at this stage. I'm all for optimism but that just lacks all credibility - even in the ultra-FOMO environment of the spring we never got remotely close to that.
Click on the RNS link above.
Then click on the third RNS from the top.
There are four NEDs at Argo right now who will all bring something different to the table. It's not immediately obvious to me what Sarah's particaular niche is.
The other three are:
- Colleen Sullivan, lawyer, former FinTech exec, former CEO of CMT Digital and now crypto investment lead for hedge fund Brevan Howard. A serious player.
- Maria Perrella, many years of CFO experience at cutting-edge engineering and automation firms.
- Matthew Shaw, crypto fund manager, serial digital entrepreneur.
My guess would be that Sarah won't be centrally involved in strategic direction etc as Colleen and Matthew have that covered. Perhaps corporate governance, remuneration committee, that sort of thing, but I'm only guessing. It'll be a fee rather than a salary as such and I wouldn't expect it to be even close to £100k. A typical NED on a FTSE 250 level company will probably get £50k or so a year.
Yeah a discussion board with no discussion would be much better.
No, of course I am not saying that.
EUA have to disclose that they've sold shares via a private placement. They have done so. It's a purely proforma RNS. You'd never expect EUA to disclose the placee because (a) they don't have to, and (b) it's not their place to do so.
If the placee is a US institutional investor, they have to disclose their holding. Nobody has done so. It's possible that this is just because they haven't got around to reporting it yet (it's a quarterly requirement) - but that can't be the case for the May placement.
I'm really not making any nefarious or hard-to-understand claims here. EUA have absolutely not done anything wrong by not disclosing the placee.
Because there is absolutely no rule saying that EUA have to disclose who their shareholders are. Quite often they won't even know, after all.
US disclosure rules trump what they want to be known. No US II is going to refuse to disclose, it's just not worth the grief for what is at the end of the day a piddling sum of money at current prices. Why on Earth would they?
There's money to be made in RIOT and HIVE. I'm trying to choose which one to move my MARA holding into.
But I'll keep hold of ARB until it corrects with reference to the other miners - which surely must happen at some point.
What do I need to prove? All the evidence shows that no institution bought and held those shares - unless a "major US II" is wilfully choosing not to declare its holdings, which seems vanishingly unlikely.
More interestingly, still no sign of the institution who bought the recent placing. There was lots of speculation at the time that it was probably forward-sold. Looking that way.
The share price will catch up with reality eventually. It's a bit annoying that it does so only in fits and starts but it doesn't really matter unles you're looking to sell, I guess.
No point at all really. But the stock exchange trade log simply doesn't include that information, so it can only ever be a guess.
Sure, there's no law saying a gold miner can't buy EUA. Just as there's no law that Elon Musk can't, or Bill Gates, or Marks & Spencer! That doesn't mean they are planning to do so, and inferring as much because Polyus happen to be raisingm some capital is an extraordinary reach.
Why do people keep thinking there will be a suspension? For a standard takeover bid by an external party there's no particular reason for a suspension at all.
Polyus? The world-top-ten gold miner who have enormous but expensive-to-develop reserves at eg Sukhoi Log?
So, is this huge GOLD MINER raising cash to develop their own enormous existing GOLD resources? Or buying a random PGM explorer (I can't really say producer.)
I wonder!
EUA's nearly doubled from August too (15p on the 27th)...
Anyone remember the "indoor fireworks" you used to get in, ohhhh, must have been around the late seventies? You tended to get a few lacklustre sparkles but mostly just a worm-shaped pile of ash.
Leaving Las Vegas
Requiem For A Dream
What tremendous logic GAZALA. Sadly utter tosh. The uncrossing trade was 24p. Therefore the true closing price is 24p. That's basically all there is to it.
Not that it matters. It's just a historical fact now, not a current price.
You're.