Member Info for isas

Magicman what you say about companies on AIM maybe true of a large majority and if Lenigas is your hero as you quote him you have to remember how many people he has shafted, go and visit Doriemus bb. He has also been kicked off AIM. There are a number of good companies on AIM who have returned investors from their investments many times over (eg CAML) and it is te example of these companies they we should be emulating rather than the sharks.

Because investors have been let down precisely by the same arguments over the past years. To show some confidence and share risk with investors why don't bod announce they will cut their salaries and/or take half in shares etc. If you are genuine investors then you need to turn the onus on the bod to come up with workable solutions for taking the company forward. Remember this is the only time you have any sway over the bod, after they get their way they can skin you any way they like as they have done in the past. Bear in mind that any time the price of shares has shown signs of improvement along they have come to dump at considerable discount to their mates BS and other brokers.

You need to read the rns's for each headroom increase, it is the same. They have not committed themselves to give us the opportunity this time we are so close we will close a very good commercial deal in x months time to make the company self sustaining. People are just using scare tactics here by saying if we don't bend over like the bod say the company shuts. there are many ways to re-organise financing starting by cutting costs- if the present bod is incapable of doing it then someone else needs to come in- simples- if you want history repeated and having a same debate in 12months time with billion plus shares in circulation then by all means vote yes.

They would need to come with solution that satisfies the shareholders or resign then the chairman needs bring an interim management team and review and share the strategy, work out a business plan as to what amount of moneys are required to get one drug to a commercial stage and ask shareholders to increase the headroom to that level. no more no less. review the situation after having commercialised the one drug.

A good management works with all interested parties to understand and address their concerns- not keeping on issuing ultimatums. The bod are employees of the company, not only of current investors but new ones in the future. Any one with an ounce good management skills should have gauged over the past 3years that there investors in the company who have concerns with this annual ritual of increasing the headroom, After the second consolidation we had about 30m share in issue, it has increased to 454m now. bod should explain, engage and carry with them the owners of the capital. not say every year do this or the alternative is the company dies- don' you agree that is not management but blackmail.

I think they issued from previous authority granted by egm in December 2017.

Freddie the next 454m shares they hand out to their friends for however much isn't going to last forever either, do you want the history to keep repeating itself ad infinitum. They need to spell out a plan that this is the amount of money they need to get to commerciality and put their money in the company to convince us and new investors. You just have to go through the history over the last 9years or more to see its the same arguments, we are so close, if you don't give us the head room you would bankrupt the company, nothing about their own responsibility to run the company in the best interests of the shareholders.

Why should i do that, since you are so obliging and like being shafted why don't you do the same, I'm afraid I don't enjoy their sadism.

He can be open and transparent by putting the same information on their own website to confirm that it is the company who are saying this and can be held liable if it is false info. These guys on twitter are foot soldiers for brokers/ bod who will ultimatly benefit. Don't trust this gossiping/ trust me i'm honest guv chatter. Don't be gullible.

Heres something for the supporters of the bod's actions, ask them to announce that they will reduce their pay in half or delay receiving it until the company is has executed a commercial deal on at least one of the drugs, alternatively they could receive half their salaries by using it to buy stock from the market, like the chairman of OXB. This will demonstrate their commitment to the company and the drugs in development and the price of shares will shoot up , VAL would be the darling of the market. The fact is the bod have lost respect by rinsing and repeating the same mantra over 14 or so years, as they say you maybe able to fool some of the people some of the time and not all the people all of the time.

Holden and other genuine shareholders bear in mind in the next few days you will get a lot of bods apologists posting skewed information and view points and I dare say they will scare many people into voting for the resolutions, I have seen it over the past 7 seven years these same scare tactics. Giving away pre-emption rights is giving up your rights to be offered these to you, and I believe these rights are marketable even if you don't take them up. IT would be like committing suicide don't give them.

If you give up pre-emption rights that means you are not going to have a rights issue it is giving up your rights a s a shareholder giving the power to the bod to do placings to whomever at whatever price- equivalent for turkeys voting for christmas.

What proposals? they are asking for a blank cheque of 400m plus of shares to be dished out as when they please, there is nothing in the rns about any proposals nor anything about bod aligning there interests with investors or about reducing costs through reducing bod pay, all the burden is and will continue to be on investors.

Us PI's are fools really keep on repeating the same bs of the bod, when the opportunity arises to hold them to account, end up finding axcuses. IF you look back last December when they raised the headroom- De ja vous.

by voting no you putting a no confidence in the bod, they will either have to come up with some proof they are capable of commercialising the products or would need to resign, so someone else would come in to evaluate and progress the products to a commercial stage. At the moment the bod do not have any incentives to speed the products to commercialisation. They are happy to dish out shares at any price to keep their jolly lifestyles.

Why can't the so called supposed partners, buy shares of the market, surely its cheap as chips. Agree with Tullaghan top post- highly recommended.

Exactly G3, they raised funding for 201 back in December and in May I believe, 401 is complete and awaiting commercialisation or so we are led to believe. next progress should be funded from commercialisation/ and or cutting management costs.

I would suggest people (investors) email the company to let them know their feelings and they would not support increasing the head room and disapplication of pre-emption rights unless a fully worked route commercialisation is provided and also they need to reduce significantly their own salaries until the company is in a healthy financial position(revenue generation). I would definitely be voting against these resolutions, until I am re-assured by some clear route to commercialisation.

Too much for the work they do - especially when you consider any real work is then dished out to consultants. one of their roles is to stand for the shareholders interests, from the evidence so far they appear to be just nodding in agreement just whatever the executives tell them.

a bit of volume is needed to shuffle it along.