Member Info for JakeSnake

Full disclosure: I got out this afternoon at a small loss because I decided I didn't want to wait a few more years for actual credible or verifiable news about actual and real business activities. So I'm moving on.

Judging by comments here, I don't think they're conclusive because of the secrecy in these tiny cap tech companies. There was one I missed before, and it was an Israeli company producing faster internet routers than in common use. I thought the CEO was lying or exaggerating, but I was wrong. I'm not worried about that because holding bags while everyone is clearing out is a really poor outcome. There is poor management in this company, definitely. They're based in Reading, and Reading and other places west of London is like the UK's Silicon Valley when it comes to data centres and high-tech industries. However, AIM itself is a crapshoot with many Potemkin villages in it. What if the real reason they want to delist is because AIM's rules, scant as they are, pose risks to them when it comes to what they can say, unverified, about the business. Also, they have to provide audited and accurate informaiton to the exchange. Why is that so inconvenient? Example: the Elon Musk debacle appears to have been generated by a Daily Mail article and was attributed to "sources". Journalists can "protect their sources", which is pretty convenient when you're the 140-IQ guy and the journo is happy with a Biarritz holiday or whatever... And that IS the problem. If super-smart aliens landed here the only rational thing to do would be to fight them, because you couldn't trust anything they say because they're too advanced. I think this company tried to treat investors like computers, and tried to program us. There is a certain level of contempt in the way they spit out jargon and buzzwords and expect us to take everything at face value. Almost like the company was run by some NFT grifters (not saying they are, but as the saying goes, "build it and they will come" rather than "say you're building something, expect people to come, offer no timelines or evidence", etc.) Nevertheless, I hope everyone who sticks with it does well. My pov is, no matter how "smart", it's a business, and the people in any business are just like gardeners. Gardener is supposed to turn up and do the job for the price quoted. Not raise capital on the back of a website and a couple of Youtube videos. I don't care if my gardener has 140+ IQ. I don't care about his future prospects if I give him money to buy a new lawnmower. And, above all, I don't trust him when he says he'll give me a cut of anything. Because he's smarter than me and the rational thing to do in all human affairs is to lie and exploit people for personal advantage (in general, i.e. I'm not accusing anyone but you catch my drift).

Hi, as a new poster here (like me) you probably got in late (also like me). I think these people (the posters) are in trouble because they bought at a very high price, so they may be desperate. My view is that the company's business is completely opaque, but you can pick things up nonetheless from past press and news releases and minimum marketing materials.

I think Curren (founder) was excited when SND listed. He was a big shareholder (still is, just half as big as before). You can see a video of him when the listing occurred. Then look at the most recent video of him. Totally different mood - the guy most likely has given up, so he was replaced (most likely at the insistence of Rox). So what we have here is a company started by someone who's a very clever man - computer scientist level of intelligence - who is unworldly and most likely got carried away by the world of numbers and graphs (pertaining to the period of SND being on AIM) and just saw his personal paper net worth reduce significantly and now wants to go deep into the world of steam trains or whatever (as such types tend to do).

What I think it boils down to is that our interests and views of the company will be different from the promoters as we got in lower than them. So what it ultimately depends upon is, is this an actual serious business? All the engineers will know, but they have been muzzled (not only by NDAs but probably had the fear of God put into them about national security, etc.) As for the private equity people "Rox", that's a curious South African and double-barreled English concern, and they may have been able to front the money through sorcery (exploitation of debt available to them). So what it depends upon is whether this is real. The Elon Musk BS is a big red flag, IMO. Then again, it's an actual fact that Rox paid 10p per share for this. So were they fooled, and if they were, don't they care? Or were they not fooled? Is SND a real business as it claims to be (in which case it's very cheap)?

Maybe the plan is to pop SND into this:

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/15741689/filing-history

I think this question I have may be relevant as to why they paid 10p per share, and it may affect our expectations.

I wonder, is this a serious business here to make money like any other, or is it a GCHQ front that merely wants to acquire useful intellectual property and the engineers that Rox has?

https://tracxn.com/d/venture-capital/rox/__SBu6EgWALM2RA-5qJaLVD3sQtitf8hWdkYQgW4gk0sY

fair comment, cheers, and thanks for the heads-up.

there is a misconception among professionals about retail investors, i.e. that we simply don't know what we're doing. however, it's right and fair that pros should point out the very real risks associated with investing, as that's their moral duty as professionals. naturally, in any sector and for all types and size of company there will be boosters. we can see the problems with things like the elon musk claim, for example. however, we are opportunists, too. just like everyone else. the price reflects that there aren't many true believers here.

the point she/he makes that i think is fair is that rox doesn't plan to lose money. someone must know something, even if that isn't us. if there is real desperation and fraud in the mix, then an insider may go heavily leveraged long or short between now and the 21st in order to get out unscathed. that would be rational behaviour, and it's something us minnows can't do. another possibility is that rox were misled, i.e. despite being professionals they got taken for fools simply because the subject matter requires a higher than average iq to even understand what the heck it is. so i'm imagining rox got a big presentation pack and a glossy brochure with lovely photos and bar graphs, went home to their mansions in surrey, thought, "**** me i don't understand this but ai sounds like the next big thing" and went with it at 10p a share (which seems an amazing thing to do, considering our lack of info). retail doesn't often beat these types. but it appears we (or at least i) did? so maybe they are the bad dudes in this situation, behind all these rumours, having made a mistake.

the company claims to be able to speed up the process of ic production from design to finished article, and to have stronger protections against copycat thanks to the bespoke chip architecture which their process entails. the website has china on it along with other countries, but no china office or china recruitment, implying that this is a safer pair of hands than

That's it then.

https://www.tipranks.com/news/company-announcements/sondrel-shareholders-vote-for-private-transition

If anyone looks at your previous posts they will see you expressed the same doubts as I did, in my post. That's why I'm not too happy with you tbh. But it's not personal and everyone should be happy since we're in significant profit now. No need to overreact - it's just a discussion.

Your rationale makes no sense because, like the others, you're just spreading rumours. I'm more than 30% up on this stock so what I'm concerned about is when to sell. It seems to me you and the others are going to pump this until 21 August and get out some time between now and then. I don't take your rationale at face value because you, like me, have no reason to believe it's going to relist in America, or that Neuralink was involved in this company, etc. We're in the same boat, buddy, except I'm honest.

As yourself and the other poster implied, nobody would be squeamish about holding shares in a private Sondrel if the plan is to list on Nasdaq. However, there's no evidence that that's the plan. Just the rumour.

The issue I have is that, as someone who bought a small number of shares in this company last week for 2.20 per share, I'm aware that there are many people holding big bags, who are seeing red. Therefore, there is a lot of motivation there to spread about false rumours to pump the price until 21 August as these people sell their bags. They will want to mitigate their loss. Everyone's been here longer than me and the share price at the present time doesn't reflect any faith that it's going to America. In fact, there's more indication of a crisis of faith. For example, Curren's holdings have been halved and he's stepped aside. Rox would have required him to do that. Chubb is ex-Royal Navy - why get an ex-RN CEO? 2 possibilities: (1) you're after the defence procurement market; (2) you feel you've been misled and messed about, and now you want a no-nonsense CEO.

To sum up, I think Rox may have been misled by hype and false rumours, just like any retail investor. However, I, personally, haven't made my mind up at all. Just curious as to whether you think this gets relisted (in America) in the future.

But it's an end-up; sort of like an opposite of a startup.

Why would they want a long-term position in a delisted company?