Obone I can answer your second question: it’s the ability to raise capital via placing, not a placing in itself. And if there is no ability for the directors to raise capital if necessary, then the market will hammer the sp even more than the effect of any potential dilution in the future. In addition, and of equal importance, with the ability to raise capital we are not having discussions with a gun to our heads and can negotiate on equal terms. All imho
Anyone who’s been in business knows that the bigger picture is more important. If we have to be nice but professional to achieve our end goal then so be it. People on here bang on about CH not being professional and this rns says anything but.
Reg - you’re a glass half empty kind of person and I get that, but it does get quite tiresome.
If I can interject, the aim director share dealing rules talk about the 30 day closed period is in relation to the release of financial results - interims, quarterly, final et al. When it comes to other undisclosed price sensitive information, this is just anytime i.e. as long as he wasn't aware of any undisclosed price sensitive info before the 26th October, then if there was to be any subsequent rns of this kind it could be released from the 27th October onwards. This is just my reading of the rules. Others may disagree but this is how I read them to say. IMHO.
The appeal process stops once the appeal is thrown out for the last time, period. You can’t appeal against the permit once it’s been issued, that just makes a mockery of the whole judiciary and due process! Also, if ARSO make a statement to say there was no undue influence or pressure in the permit process, then surely there’s no review required.