I quoted that in my original post. The point is he was actually hoping the the "revenue" of a loss making company could be "passed on to us as pre production divi" lol He then expresses a lack of hope and belief of such likelihood by stating "there is no chance" but then continues to theorize by stating "but if you don't ask you don't get".
No mate, you "don't get" not because you "don't ask" but because there is one big nothing in distributable reserves account :)
Read your original post 15LIVES, it clearly indicates a lack of basic understanding of the concept of dividend. No doubt about it. Your have then been exposed by Foxhound in his post at 12:46 . The moment you realized how stupid your original post you attempted to twist the situation around and started suggesting that it was said "in jest". Was it really? Chronology doesn't lie.
Your original sentence says it all: "Maybe if sold the unexpected revenue could be passed on to us as a pre production divi as a thank you for our patience and backing." - a complete lack of basic understanding of one of the most fundamental financial concepts. Strange, considering how keen you normally are to engage in "future divi" conversations.
You then get defensive, trying to divert attention from your mistake and attempt to take the focus off subject.
In conclusion, a complete clown.
It's never too late to learn, they say. Too late for you I guess.
"Maybe if sold the unexpected revenue could be passed on to us as a pre production divi as a thank you for our patience and backing. I know there's no chance. But if you don't ask you don't get." 15LIVES
There is no chance because dividends are by definition a distribution of post-tax surplus profits and not revenue.
Understanding of the basic financial concepts wouldn't hurt either.
“I personally take possibility of further dilution into consideration and include it in my calculations. If you think about it even if the number of shares let's say doubled but everything went as planned, Sirius is still a decent long term investment.”
Oh yes, of course I took it into consideration (as we can see correctly). It doesn't prevent me in any way however from criticising it when it did happen (we were all hoping the bad scenario won't materialise but unfortunately it did).
You are trying really hard. Try harder.
I truly hope you can objectively do the justice with the same level of fierceness to whoever agreed for JPM to act as purchaser for the initial bonds on a "best effort basis" in April... :)
Wording makes a huge difference, doesn't it?
The fact that you are still willingly invested here having cited such 'promises' tells that.
No it doesn't 15LIVES. One can invest based on research and it doesn't stop him from 'citing' and criticising if one wishes. Freedom of expression and opinion.
Really last one now
I don't know what's more scary: your last post or the fact you got six ticks for it straight away!
Or maybe you, like Scotman, just struggle to keep up with the arguments and use tactical deception in order to spread a deliberate disinformation to create some confusion on the board?
And you've based your investment here on that notion?
I never said that. I said that what has been communicated to the public by the company over the years never materialized.
Your perception and degree of objective judgement you apply to it is your personal choice.
A deliberate use of words suggesting a high degree of positive future outcome like aim, plan, intend etc can be considered as a form of 'promise' and has a material impact on future investment decisions. They have never 'contractually guaranteed' the result - true, but they have indicated the high degree of possibility on many occasions and in various documents, presentations, media etc. and all has been needed over the years is a greater degree of honesty with shareholders IMO.
Under-delivery (funding)? In my opinion yes. At least to date. 10bln shares in issue, shareholders value destroyed and deal not even completed yet. No further comments, current SP speak for itself.
Don't pick apart every word I say mate, that's not the point.
All right, out for good now.
I can't help you, I am sorry.
I don't "dis" my own investment, I openly criticise factors that may have a negative impact on my investment.
It's good to allow a contrarian opinion to your limited unidirectional world from time to time, it broadens the mind.
Take responsibility for your own actions, and put on a different record.
Oh I definitely do, I take full responsibility every time I press 'buy' or 'sell' button. I have no issue with that. And I hope Chris takes full responsibility for the delivery of ST2 , current situation and failure to maintain shareholder value to date too. And that his actions will receive a just and objective reconciliation on this board one day.
For now, let's just hope that he knows what he's doing. After all we are all in the same boat.
Am I personally 100% confident that he will deliver in September after what we've seen to date? Hell no.
Enough about Chris today. Sunday funday.
I wonder why you suddenly so focused on "exposure" and completely disregarded the essence of my post in your reply. You don't have to be overexposed to to be down 60-70% like many here my friend and that's not what we've been discussing here.
A clue: false promises, under-delivery, failure to maintain shareholders value and responsibility that comes with it.
Hope it helps.