Member Info for leew

It does actually make sense, those in are in from earlier and those out are waiting to see numbers. The placing at 1.2p and the arbitration RNA created enough noise to ground the SP and not provide incentive to get in before results to new investors.

Sorry should have added, Sement does not need profit to list as at early stages it’s probably valued off revenue but that does not mean your theory is wrong as with no additional info it could a 100 different things.

It’s to do with GST believing Semnet should have extra profit, that’s all we know and speculation beyond that opens up 100’s of different reason and scenarios. Could one requirement of questioning the profit be to do with the listing yes it could. It’s really how long is a piece of string as there could be many reasons to chase extra profit you believe is due, starting with the obvious which is what company does not want the profit to be as high as possible.

Audavid, I think $10m revenue would be beyond good results, that’s exceptional, based on the first half, to jump to 10 overall would be a heck of a jump in the 2nd half.

If the second half has grown by 2 compared to the first and assets are in and around 10 I would be very happy that it shows good progress.

I can see the FUD now if GST has grown again - why has it not grown more, why no profit, why are assets not higher lol.

Either way not long now.

Morefondle, probably the most sensible post this week 😂

I think if I re-read my contributions I would realise I am

Just banging my head against the wall and it’s pointless

Very roughly it’s 60% buys, 40% based on actual spreads etc on almost no volume.

GST opened up 50-60% on a BTC treasury RNS, so if the results show YoY growth I suspect it jumps on open unless the placing still has some drag.

I suspect there is still placing volume needed personally based on the multiples traded but any high volume day clears it early either way.

Hornet, they will take more than that for the same price. Although the displayed price is about 5% down compared to the 1.025p from the other day, the different in selling a decent QTY is 0.001p.

The mm’s just trying to make a market as it’s their job.

The volume has been low, we had a placing at 1.2p, we have had no confirmation of BTC purchase, and we are waiting results. So it’s just waiting now l, unless volume goes through the roof in one direction, but GST has always seemed a very tight ship hence it moves quick.

Moomins, just needs to go up to what it has been and Tommy £75 will buy something nice lol

This I agree with, I did not like the raise for BTC personally, and then not announcing any purchases in an RNA was a mistake, yes they don’t have to but by raising capital to buy them I think they should have told everyone to prevent guess work.

Sandgrounded, a BB like this is always hard to understand context and understand the nature and reasoning of the questions hence many people (me included) get defensive sometimes as it’s the nature of the beast lol. Also only the person writing knows there background / knowledge and no one else does so a lawyer could be arguing with a postman for all everyone knows lol.

The simple way I look at it is the volume is low and it must be slightly more sells than buys to cause a slow drip down. If it was the opposite with a small drip up everyone would be happy but ironically a small tick up on low volume would be equally no indication of what’s coming.

Sandgrounded, not offended at all, just did not really

know how to answer your question on who to contact so suggested the 2 routes, 1 if you think the RNA is wrong and the other if help interpreting the RNA was needed.

We all only know what we know, I luckily have a decent contact background, but even then I got someone I know who is far better at legal jargon to read it so I had their opinion.

I am invested, remain invested, and not worried. If another RNA appears that makes me worried I will react accordingly.

Either way look on the bright side not long to find out lol.

The appropriate person is someone who understands the topic, not thinks they know.

You can pay for that, speak to someone you know for free, or you know yourself.

If you believe the RNA is wrong then I guess you go to the relevant people listed on the RNA as every RNA has them listed at the bottom. I will assume you can pick the right contact at the bottom.

BFD, because the lack of understanding on the topic is mind blowing.

Sandgrounded, yes I do thanks it will centre around what market it’s on, as that dictates who is in the process.

AIM you are still debating if non-complete and non-compete is correct or even if 1 exists, after telling me my knowledge on arbitration was utter rubbish, which to put in context I find hilarious but does not affect me or my decisions so you think what you want.

We all want the same outcome and this conversation won’t affect the outcome so that’s why I won’t respond.

My advice to anyone is if you don’t understand the RNA, or believe there is an issue with it, speak to someone who is qualified to provide you with legal counsel and it clears the fog.

AIM, I said I won’t comment on arbitration anymore so I won’t. My view was utterly wrong in your view so just leave it at that.

There are many legal experts on here anyway that after 5 days are still debating if non-compete or non-complete is the wording and if one term even exists so let’s leave it at that.

As a point you made there are 3 main reasons in your view, so I assume that means there are other reasons that are not classed as main.

AIM, ok mate it’s utter rubbish then, I can think of other reasons why it was announced but if you’re convinced it’s due to that I am ok with that.

If another RNA comes out saying results are delayed due to the arbitration RNA that was announced and we forgot to mention that in the first RNA then you are right and I am wrong.

Won’t reply to any arbitration topics again to anyone.

I said this the other day, if arbitration in 1 section / contract within your business prevented results no FTSE company would ever publish results.

Think of it this way if you never wanted to publish results just create endless arbitration cases. When written like that surely that makes no sense to everyone who has this concern?

Who knows if another RNA drops out the blue to give a genuine reason to delay results, but the current RNA on arbitration does not give a reason to delay, and if it did for god knows what reason it would be communicated in that previous RNA as it materially would affect GST.

Chill out, sit back, sell, buy, hold or what ever while waiting the company to talk in an official RNA. I am out not until results as it’s just circular discussions that I am also stupidly getting involved with.

The MMs are doing what they can to make a market when there is very little buying or selling. MM’s typically don’t want to hold shares, they make money on the spread, carrying shares is a risk they don’t need and is not their business model.

Select has summed it up, we all make our choices and that’s what makes investing interesting, someone is right and someone is wrong it’s just the way it is. Be right more times than you’re wrong and you win.

Zag, 10m in asset growth is not high IMO, it was circa 7 without BAKE so I think growth to 10m on assets is feasible.

The x2 growth for the revenue I see as achievable (min) when working backwards from the $4.2 as the end cash result.

So just for clarity what figures do you think supports a market cap of 20% less than today? With cash and assets included I struggle to see how the previous results and trajectory don’t support a high market cap than today, so not sure what results I would expect in terms of numbers to drop the current market cap, unless there is a written statement in results stating impending major issues.