Member Info for lordloadsoflolly

PBTX was trading around the 20p - 25p mark whilst holders were locked in. The moment they COULD actually sell, the price plummeted and has continued to tumble pretty much ever since. It could be a punt at its current 7p buy level. But to me that depends how much you believe SOH's vague suggestion of upgrading from Aquis to Aim. Aquis is so illiquid, it's uninvestable as an exchange IMHO. I personally don't think SOH currently has enough credibility left to take anything said at face value. So I'll be steering well clear. And if I miss a buying opportunity, so be it. I've bought enough "opportunities" on Aim already that turned out to be total duds, without potentially adding to them.

baf3 - Or you could argue that had they structured Lucyd's IPO better, taking a bit of money off the table when the price was $7.50 (including the two warrants), we wouldn't have had to be diluted yet again.

Apeirogon - probably all chatbots.

Pokerchips - think we know the answer to that question. As for lambo222's "Rumours of submission rejection", does he honestly expect anyone to take that seriously? He just makes it up as he goes along to suit his own agenda.

Tivman - I wouldn’t assume funding stops once the four current holdings have IPOd. Presumably even now, potential NEW investment opportunities are being examined. So the whole thing could theoretically rinse & repeat ad nauseam. Which is why, without any real clarity on special dividend timing or payout levels, averaging down on TEK remains an absolute no no for me (though I retain my existing holding, only now more in hope than faith).

Clenchedcheeks - I agree. His last presentation was like TEK for Dummies. It told existing investors absolutely nothing new, whilst filing any awkward questions in the shredder. Utterly pointless.

oscar22 - it was all going so well until point 6 combined “management expertise” & “Tim McCarthy” in the same sentence. You do realise how daft that makes you look?

SirTradealot - quite. Always worth reminding ourselves that NO-ONE knows where ANY company's share price is heading. Unless they're an inside trader. And then, hopefully, they'd be banged up pretty pronto anyway.

Quite. Common sense & Motley Fool simply don't belong in the same sentence. The clue's in the name.

I've posted many times that TEK should take some (not all) money off the table at IPO stage. Even if this meant a slightly lower launch valuation for the holding in question, it would give TEK a significant war chest to fund its remaining unlisted companies. I was largely shot down in flames when I first suggested this. But the alternative is that we get frequent placings, like today's. Which LTHs will only tolerate for so long, before they ditch & switch. Also, there's often a lot of price froth at IPO, which soon subsides afterwards. LUCY was a case in point. Despite the recent rise, it's still way off its launch price, even taking into account the warrants. TEK could easily build in an IPO divest clause when acquiring its majority stakes Yet it stubbornly refuses to do so. The lure of potential special dividends at some unspecified future date starts to wear pretty thin when your TEK shares are regularly diluted and consistently losing value.

maidit08 - the ASK was 3.3p when you posted, not the BID (which was 2.91p). Still a chunky one day rise though.

pokerchips - well yes, if you take posts at face value they often seem odd. Which is why it's unwise to take them at face value.

DALLO - yes, it would appear so! DRAYE - It's irrelevant whether your buy price is 2p, £2 or £200 a pop. Any share could still go to zero. Which is why some investors get cold feet & sell up.

So there it is folks. All we can safely conclude is that NO-ONE has a clue where the price is heading. Which we kinda knew already, as it's always the case.

oscar22 - no real need to add that disclaimer at the end. We'd kinda guessed you were more ramper, less "professional financial advisor".

pokerchips - & both Tims fully deserve them. Not.

There seem to be an awful lot of shares & funds trading well below NAV currently (especially tech/bio ones). Guess that's inevitable when interest rates & inflation suddenly soar, making assets harder to value.

ilovemycombover - I'd also say no great cause for alarm! Given H&T has around 40,000,000 shares in issue, the dilution effect of an extra 137,451 is pretty negligible.

hardboy - agreed. I'd say options are good, PROVIDED their terms encourage employees to deliver results. In other words, they should ONLY be exercisable if profits (hence the share price) have also risen substantially by the end of the vesting period. Sadly, far too many are handed out with no strings attached. Which can encourange dead wood as much as enterprise.

TrustedInvestor - your comment kinda echoes what I've been saying for some time on here now: "We will be quids in when tek decides to sell lucy shares at some point in the future and a bumper special dividend for the shareholders". My question is why don't Tek sell some (not all) of their shares in each holding on IPO? They could still hang onto enough to benefit from any subsequent rise. But IPOs often create short-lived froth (as with LUCY, which is still well below its flotation value). By hanging onto their full holdings, TEK are missing a trick. I don't buy the argument that these IPOs would raise a significantly lower value if TEK nnounced they were reducing on launch. Plenty of fund managers adopt this very approach without any apparent detriment.