Member Info for KingHomerJ

Trout,

Yes maybe they should have raised earlier at a higher price….but again that shows lack of market awareness and lack of thought for shareholders.

Therefore didn’t get the best deal….

They still don’t have any form of holding and they also didn’t take part in the fund raise…and never have…

Yet the current BOD are asking to vote for the same rinse repeat….

Not even to mention the CEO is leaving…

What buy shares worth £2k at 0.20 when the TR1's sell up to 60 millions worth of shares and deplete the share price by 50%

Why didn't they buy in the placing? And they have already stated in the presentation the reasons why they dont/ wont

Laura….

I’m the last presentation Jim stated, “The reason they don’t buy shares is that they are not wealthy people”

Does he believe all shareholders are wealthy people then…….

People invest in companies and put there trust in a BOD to execute a plan to generate shareholders value…

The board did not get the best deal available in the market at the last placing and that’s been proven as fact….therefore all trust is eradicated to ZERO….

It’s that simple…

Where is Jim's business plan???..... All you need to do is look at the Investors Meet Company presentations since the dawn of time....Its been the same old narrative, quoting - M&S, Infectious points, increased pipelines.... for years.....and tears.....its there to see so id ask anyone to please go check.

This RNS is frankly juvenile, whoever is advising the company needs sacking and the fact the BOD thinks wasting cash on "Reports" and "RNS" like this is a benefit....for a "report" to literally be full of nothing...

Would a business give a competitor a there business plan.....No They wouldn't.

This will look silly pretty quickly for JM.... and cement that fact the as chairman of the company is market awareness and understanding is non existent mean we already got confirmation of that when HE didn't get the best deal at the last placing.....which means the likelihood is all the previous placings were exactly the same....shareholders destruction, via incompetence

JM also stated in the last presentation he / the BOD wouldn't be spending any further shareholder funds in an expensive vote they cannot win.....I guess a week later that's not the case.... As numerous people have already stated....JM will deplete as much shareholder's cash as possible as he know already he cant win the vote.... Scorched Earth mentality

JM has no interest in doing what's right for shareholder - As he would have already stepped aside....

TradeWizard - I'm not asking anyone to agree with my statement....Merely just pointing out my view...

Some will agree...

Some wont...

What most to agree on is that there should have been a compromise...This isn't happening... Therefore its a simple matter of sticking with the same old BOD (With the CEO who created the increase in revenue leaving) or Voting for change with a BOD who are heavily invested...

1. The office space they hire is shared office space and most of the work is done remotely and at home.

2. My understanding is that only Pete as a director and CEO is full time….the rest have there own roles elsewhere….which is no different to what you are suggesting with the potential new board.

3. The potential new board have mentioned that net are speaking to Blue chip board members…

4. They would employ a CEO (like for like for Pete)

Therefore nothing really changes does it on the points you make….other than you have a new board that are significantly invested in the company…

Yes there is risk there is always risk….

There is risk in staying as is

There is risk in change

I beleive at this point the latter is the better option for shareholders….

As I stated there should have been a compromise…but that’s not an option….

It is what it’s is….and people are allowed to have whatever view they wish…

What about the relationship already built by current team members and the business development manager who clearly have been fantastic at converting….

I’m not sure JM can take any of that credit???

Pete Yes ….

What about the scenario of sticking with the same old board that has needed stabilising for a decade….

There should have been a compromise as I’ve previously stated….thats not an option…

Voting for change is far better than rinse and repeat….

Your point about relationships is void as After all the CEO is / was leaving anyway prior to all of this…..

Therefore if none of this had occurred the uncertainty would have been the same….

With a new BOD (who are significantly invested )and a New CEO (or if Pete wanted to stay) surely thats a far better possibility than historical status quo.

Trout...This is Spot on...

Most of the news today was already known by the market as per Jan update....Bar the positive EBITDA - Which is clearly a positive sign...

The company also stated that yesterdays contract, Would significantly bolster this years revenue..

Additionally as per Mo's interview this morning he has stated that the company has issued 50% more proposals in Q1 than the same time last year....

As we both know proposal stage is generally the final hurdle after discussions, briefings etc pre signing of a contract....appreciate these proposal can take time mind...

Agreed it’s what we knew..

Key thing is Iliad and the statement, Yearly revenue bolsters significantly from yesterdays contract…

The potential new board have said numerous times that they are speaking to TWO people from Blue Chip companies in this field….

Likley be explained tomorrow in the presentation….

The deal will happen…these things take time… them receiving funding (actual cash in bank) will also take time…

Brokers Buy Rating range from 16.5p to 25p….

Abit like modern day politics…..why would the potential new BOD fully disclose a long term plan…. For maybe the current BOD’s to adopt those point without the market savvy skills to do it and again why would ANY bod disclose a plan to potential competitors….

The New BOD have mentioned about offering options to ALL employees….like BDM I’d say that’s a snippet of a plan…

And I’m sure the potential blue chip…directors that have shown interest will be aware of the company and it’s potential and move in the circles required…..

A compromise would have been the best option however JM took that away….

Pretty sure one has a life science degree….and how do you know there isn’t a plan…..you don’t…

Also I’m pretty sure there would be savings made within the company internally, as one is a chartered accountant, ex Nomad and Lawyer….

They had numerous options

They didn’t take them…

Therefore it’s all on them…. Frankly

Jim took that compromise away from shareholders….

If there was a compromise then I’m sure that something all shareholders would / could support…

It was there and on the table….he didn’t agree and put the company in this situation….Making it all or nothing….

It is the currents boards issue we are here…..and as to quote them directly “adding high levels of uncertainty”

Trout….something we agree on…..🤣

So add some directors that can PR the company, manage it in the market and sell the product to both clients and investors….

People are allowed to change their opinions….

Are frankly the fact the placings wasn’t the best opinion on the table and the company have been caught out in plain sight… was enough for me…

Has Peter Sargent done a great job - yes

Is there potential in the precision tools - yes…

I’ve stated Peter Sargent has done a great job…and never said anything other…

Oppose to what….the current CEO leaving without a role to go to…..that’s a warning sign and a half tbh