The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
I think some of you are being quite negative. To give Brad his due, he has probably posted an RNS given that a) a lot of people were moaning about not being kept informed enough and b) maybe we can read between the lines that he is attending this to both to enhance his learning for the benefit of ICON and also to network - there will be investors there, about 400 I think. Now if he can raise some funds, it'll be better for us. I sincerely appreciate him keeping us posted, as it shows things aren't stagnant - they are moving.
Hi everyone,
I see some are having difficulty in knowing how to submit a proxy.
I was sent a form prior to the administration and have made it available via this link:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/248UB4WVDM15iwmy5
It can also be submitted via email to:
proxy@slcregistrars.com
However... I have just emailed them because the small print refers to the June meeting and I'm hoping that they will confirm that we can submit this form without any difficulty.
Sit tight and I'll let you know what they say but if you want to go ahead, it's probably best to email, in case it takes them too long to reply.
Best,
Maria
It's been a while since I posted, but I came across this and thought I'd share it. It's the usenof past tense that's got me worried. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20211015005426/en/EHGO-Statement-on-Iconic-Labs
It's a shame that this was initiated in November under the former BoD. I know the company is liable and not the individuals and that this should have been handled more swiftly - the only possible saving grace is EHGO's rescue bid.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/10197256/charges
It says 'satisfy charge' so I wonder why it hasn't been satisfied yet, since EHGO promised they are in a position to.
Hi there. I got contact emails for the Administrators and thought I'd pass it on for thos who may wish to petition them to accept the promise to pay and reverse the Administration action. I have done this myself. GLA
Mr. Antony Batty – antony@antonybatty.com
Mr. Hugh Jesseman – hugh@antonybatty.com
"The court can only make an administration order if it is satisfied that the company is or is likely to become unable to pay its debts, and that the order is reasonably likely to achieve the purpose of administration (Paragraph 11, Schedule B1, Insolvency Act 1986)"
Well, if the AGM goes ahead asap and the vote is positive, they'd get the EHGO funding and be able to settle the debts, surely?
" The first objective of any administration is to rescue the company (as opposed to the business that the company carries on) so that it can continue trading as a going concern (paragraph 3(1)(a), Schedule B1, Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986))."
"A company cannot go into administration unless it is insolvent, or likely to become insolvent, but this requirement does not apply if the administration is commenced by a QFCH."
Bearing in mind that Brad is a lawyer and that he has already done a lot to create a future purpose for Iconic, I am hoping he will work this mess out!!!
https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/7-385-3012?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)
This is just how I feel. They should have been transparent about this, but it feels like shareholders' money has been milked. It's funny, I had some inner prompts to sell... I wish I'd listened to my gut. Like other investors have posted here, bluechips from now on.
Also, dilution can be a way in which the company finds the funds to expand its portfolio. So I'm going to stick as I think it's in our best interest to vote yes and try to actually get somewhere rather than nowhere.
So some peopke heard negative
I heard "we look to create shareholder value" ; "build a portfolio of companies" ; a threefold plan.
So it's only doom and gloom OF shareholders vote no... Which is not in the interest of the company.
So shareholders vote yes to the resolutions, we get the funding in all probability because it meets the requirements of EHGO. So why panic sell when it's in our interest to vote yes?