Member Info for Jace86

Technically didn't need to publish it. No meaningful change in percentage held.

Increased holdings by 2m.

Decreased holdings due to increase of shares in issue.

I believe it is material. I'd like for them to RNS it.

Good to see that it has been updated.

Can put that all to rest now then.

LSE need to update their shares in issue figure...

As do all other outlets.

All still quoting 363M

Autocorrect keeps on pulling my pants down...

Replace of for if.

And on the message previous is for it.

And with that context then pay Allenby nothing of their clients have led to this.

Whilst the company effectively owes PIs nothing is does have an obligation to ensure that all parties, unless restricted, have access to an even market.

If I was the company, I'd be asking questions of the placees with Allenby. Allenby should be able to account for holdings past and present in this sense.

The trading activity in the run up to the news screams that parties knew and sold expecting to make a quick 25-30% whilst retaining holdings.

For this alone, we should have stuck with E3 instead of dropping the ball and momentum.

If there had been good financial advice and PR advice, this wouldn't have happened. Most of us was expecting E3 to be called up anyhow.

I've asked the company about this too OAPK.

As I've pointed out before, we remain in the dark on what was contained in this placing agreement.

It doesn't create a balanced market. It should effectively mean that all placees are also inside because of this advantage. So for those that traded their positions before this placing, have they also broken the rules?

Common for the spread to be like this down here...

It's actually closer to 1.74-1.86

I'm sure you'd rather have to go licensing out instead of having 9 figure operating costs...

On Corepath Vs BIO.

My take is that Corepath are still responsible for the testing etc etc. But they was never paying for it. An accredited lab is needed as part of the process to test the entire spectrum of kit needed that will make up the approved FDA marked test.

BIO are paying for the facilitation of this and then marketing it.

The two trades must have been a transfer of some sort. They had no impact in either direction.

We're also assuming that they was involved more than what we got told.

I think the long anticipation added to that.

It's also a bit safer as we aren't then having all the eggs in one basket with Bio-Techne doing everything for us. This could have led to a very low ball buyout. Something we shouldn't want.

Let the company grow significantly before that.

Importantly it's now no costs to us for set up.

Slightly less royalty but it's cashflow. If the test flies, the cashflow grows with the stake in "BIO" with us also benefitting from improvements made to the test along the way.

It's a good first step.

Good post Hogbog 👏

I think what we need is a better understanding of the steps required to get this to market, and understanding of our relationships with the likes of Fair journey, Biotechne and Proteogenix.

A simple process map with a big finger pointing at where we are, to keep it simple wouldn't go a miss.

Good PR would be addressing yesterday's video or simply wouldn't have let it go out.

Not so much the placing but the differences in what was said in the video Vs previous RNS and other hints paint a murky picture.

Sentiment carries a high value at this end of the market and it isnt understood by those running things.

Get new PR, keep investors engaged.

Happy to even do this through the telegram group.

I just got a WhatsApp with a lol emoji on and a screenshot...

There's an obvious clue as to my age with the numbers in my user name... Hint: I'm not 86.

As for cancel culture, as said before, if you had been unlucky enough to follow me on socials, you'll know a bit more about me and my personal views. And you aren't being cancelled, I'm opting not to see a constant stream of ad hominem. Such is the case it is now being directed at someone else. Everyone else can see your posts still 👍.

Good points raised by VV. The company should answer to that. What's changed should be a simple question to answer, if anything. The directors talk interview was garbage as the person asking the questions knew nothing about the company. They did no homework.

Fwiw, the board is full of assumptions and expectations, from me included. We all have them. I'll post again, everyone should be able to freely choose their fors and againsts as well as set their targets.

If someone asks me for a view, I'll return one. I'll not try to be a director of your emotions. That in itself is the reason why I have remained quiet today.

Not at you OAPK.

It was a reply to the original post where again I'm mentioned.

I'm muting this individual from this point on.

😴

Don't bring my name into posts unless it's something I've said.

There goes another attack again....

😴