Member Info for Ilovesushi

An extension has to be made prior to the 28 days where it must put up or shut up. I think there is no limit to the number of extensions that can be granted.

While the Takeover Code allows for extensions to deadlines, there isn't a strict numerical limit on the number of extensions that can be granted. The Panel will generally only extend the Day 60 deadline if specific circumstances exist, such as a competing offer, board consent, or specific rules outlined in the code. Extensions are granted on a case-by-case basis, considering the specific circumstances and the spirit of the Code.

Sadira and WG now highly likely both to agree to an extension which will be granted by the take-over panel. Long way for this to go yet. Could be another extension after that. Looks like the accounts need to be produced first then a consideration of further talks and conclusion of those talks. Would be a very brave company to offer without knowing or having those accounts. It could happen. It could be done while investors are left in the dark as what the accounts may reveal. There is a chance of price for the shares and a full take-over announcement and an agreement of a price. Unlikely though.

Another extension looks like the probable outcome now. Not a bad thing for WG it shows Sadira is still interested. Looks like no price is considered yet as that would have been leaked long ago. Extension it is then.

GOING HIGHER

Up 13% not 30 yet

Nortrust Nominees added 30,000,000 shares to their holding

Up 30%??

Rise is coming.

Strong opening expected. BIG RISE. Try and buy hahah

Look guys these guys want you to agree to a large placing to keep themselves on the gravy train. They have no interest in the shareholder who they are now asking to wipe themselves out. Its 90% plus dilution. Who votes for that? Vote no and send the management packing. The management has failed why keep paying them? Your going to be wiped out so vote no anyway.

DOW FUTURES DOWN 700

Looks like CPX could escape the tit for tat. Even flourish in such circumstances.

CHINA JUST HIT BACK WITH 84% TARIFFS

Unless the articles or shareholders’ agreement contains provisions to the contrary, companies can disapply pre-emption rights in certain situations by passing a board resolution or a special resolution of the shareholders at a general meeting – this requires 75% approval from shareholders who are entitled to vote, either in person or by proxy. Companies may choose to do this to raise capital from third-party investors. Importantly, this is a regular request on the AGM agenda for UK listed companies and is split into two resolutions, a resolution for an unrestricted authority and a resolution for authority specific to acquisitions or a specified capital investment only.

No. I do not see why anyone would be a holder.

Resolution 2 was a special resolution to allow the Directors to disapply pre-emption rights on an equity issue for cash and this resolution did not pass as it did not achieve the required 75% majority to be approved.

So now they are organising a 2nd vote on 28 April 2025 to vote on the same resolution. This being critical to the company to allow it to continue to trade.

I think shareholders should VOTE no again. The company is not a going concern and money goes to just pay off creditors and pay salaries.

What are pre-emption rights?

Pre-emption rights are the rights of existing shareholders to have first refusal on the issue of new shares, on a pro-rata basis, by a company. These rights are essential to protect shareholders against dilution of their shareholdings – they are a cornerstone of UK shareholder rights and are therefore enshrined in company law under the Companies Act 2006. Consequently, unless pre-emption rights are disapplied, issues of equity for cash must first be offered to shareholders in proportion to their existing holding.

So as the company wants and critically needs to raise funds to pay of creditors (who want their money by the end of April) the company will ask its own shareholders permission for the 2nd time to disapply those rights to shareholders, giving permission to the company to dilute you to death.

Better VOTE no. Even with the cash it raises there is a going concern issue here. Any more raised will pay off the creditors and any further funds is for salaries and listing costs. Its pushing the can down the road as the company will be no closer to a going concern. The next vote is critical. A no vote will force the company to call in the administrators. A yes vote keeps the company alive for a bit longer but not much longer and the eventual out come is administration.

"Shareholders should note that the number of shares that could be issued under the #PROPOSED ADDITIONAL# share authorities may result in significant dilution of the existing issued share capital. However, the Board is actively engaged in discussions regarding various fundraising opportunities, and the approval of the disapplication of pre-emption rights is the critical component in enabling the Company to continue its operation".

Looks like they have to again get approval of disapplication of -pre-emption rights. As the critical component. So another vote to get this through? Its been rejected already why another? It is critical for the management to get approval to continue to take salaries. The management has failed why give them more rights? VOTE NO. End it and call in the administrators.

You were told

"It is essential that the Company has the share authorities in place to be able to raise further funds and, should these not be granted, the future prospects of the Company are uncertain. Should the Company fail to secure additional funding ahead of the end of April, there is a risk that the Company will no longer be able to continue to trade as a going concern".

This is double speak. Read between the lines. What is being said here is despite shareholder being wiped out by the next fundraise when it needs to issue about 4-5 billion shares they need to be paid. If they are not allowed to issue more shares and get paid they will close down the business.

People will be wiped out and be diluted between 90 - 95%. Why take a hair cut to keep certain employees and managers in salaries? Just take the loss of your whole stake would be better surely? But alas rather than vote no, shareholder agreed to give the company authority to issue more shares. So expect a big drop in share price and huge dilution.

The company must now also consider a share organisation and or consolidation which will hit every investor here. If the company cannot raise funds it will have to stop trading which actually cannot be a bad thing. If it does find a funder you can bet the share price will be about the price of the nominal value 0.010 and a 50% discount to the present share price. So you not will only lose half the value here you stake will be smaller slice of a smaller cake. You going to be hit twice over and buggered the 3rd time when it gets consolidated. If does get money from a placing it will be the last and no doubt then delist where someone takes what ever remains of its assets. Administration beckons not matter what happens.

Falls any further and they will not be allowed to issues more shares even with the approval it just won. Looks like the company will have to do a consolidation together with a 4 Billion Share Placing. Of it cannot do a placing then it has to be suspended and the company is no longer a going concern.

Why did share holder vote to give the company more authority to issue more shares?

The remaining balance under the Creditor Settlement Plan, of approximately USD 400,000.

Now if they had to issue 177,000,000 to raise £88,000. And creditors must be paid their dues by the end of this month (3 weeks to go) and approximate 1Billion shares have to be issued. But as the last placing was done at 0.5 and the share price is no 0.02 that could mean 2Billion shares need to be issued. These numbers actually wipe out any investor here and are diluted by 90% plus. Now who voted to give authorities to this lot to be diluted to death? This next placing is just to pay off the creditors. How about listing costs, wages, redundancies?

Looks like the company could also do some share reorganisation and or consolidation. Looks very poor here. Looks cheap but with all those new shares to be issued what is actually left here? Is there any business at all?