Member Info for MB10

Looks like my supposition of the situation is very accurate. And good luck to Walter Mitty and those engaged in foul mouthed, personal attacks ;-)

Posting rules extract:

While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate; rudeness, swearing, insulting posts, personal attacks, or posts which are invasive of another's privacy.
You will not;
discuss illegal or criminal activities.
post any confidential or price sensitive information or that is not public knowledge.
post misleading or false statements regarding the share price and performance. Such posts are deemed as market abuse, and may be reported to the appropriate authorities.

The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.

I’ve always questioned what role Ranjit has actually played in the company and thus what value he adds to the company. Having highlighted his market abuse to the company, it will be interesting to see what they do. I personally wouldn’t be surprised if he was suspended as a Director.

However Its obvious to me that the reason Ranjit only notified the company today of his selling is that he wanted to disguise that fact, which is exactly why there are transparancy regulations set against it. That’s also the reason that I believe that the selling pressure has been removed. As I said previously, it’s clear to me that the company did not know of his actions before today and those accusing the company and other directors of knowing and also of being engaged in criminal activities as opposed to the actions of a market abusing Director had probably better start assembling the evidence they need for a good defence.

For all the reasons I’ve outlined earlier, IMO Ranjit has finished selling. He sold a round 3m shares and has engaged in market abuse in order to hide the fact that he was selling from the company and also the market (this is exactly why the FCA have those regulations, so there is transparency).

Those sales have been sat with the market makers with a limit on what they could be sold for, which explains why the share price was not increasing on the buys over the past two weeks. That pressure has now been removed and in common with other shares where there is a seller that’s done I would expect normal share mechanics to be restored.

More abuse from the angry man who has not been invested in the company and yet has been serially trolling the company on a daily bias for over 2 years. I guess we all have to have a hobby ;-)

By the way, Clive was not an active Director in the company when he was conducting his serial market abuse, whereas Ranjit is, a massive difference. Insider dealing is both a civil and criminal offence with a penalty of up to 10 years imprisonment, and plain old market abuse carries a penalty of an unlimited fine.

I know for a fact that the company are reading this thread, so may I wish you good luck.

You are assuming that the company knew he was selling. The RNS clearly states that “it has been today been informed”. So that nails out of sight that Ranjit had told the company he was selling. So you cannot ascribe the actions of one market abusing Director to those of the company. There are actually 5 separate instances of failure to adhere to the FCAs regulations, which makes him a serial market abuser.

I also understand that DC is furious that he been selling and that he failed to notify as well as illegally insider trading. I’ve already asked the company if they are planning to report him to the FCA for the market abuse I’ve highlighted, which if it comes from the company will be taken very seriously. In any case I shall be reporting him both to the Nomad and to the FCA over the weekend.

As to Ranjit’s motivation for selling, far from what the non-invested are saying, one can only speculate, but he was obviously expecting some cash as a result of the StartArt consideration. DC made him take shares instead, and maybe he was really counting on the cash so had to sell, especially as he had to convert shares earlier in the year instead of cash too? There’s been a round 3m shares sold, and the fact that he notified the company today = that’s what he was planning/had to sell IMO.

Finally, it nice to see so many non holders coming on this forum to give us the benefit of their (abusive) wisdom. Remember that these are the geniuses that invested in companies controlled by James Parsons, Zorbas and Leon Hogan who really are the creme de la creme of AIM room 101 Directors and have had such amazing success with MOS, MRS, URU and ECHO to name but a few. Its also a gutsy move to be calling the Chairman a conman and making other libeous accusations on a public forum, especially when the company has all your contact details and also have just recently avowed that they would be “taking strong legal action against Seongsu-dong Media and anyone else making false accusations against us.”

And the other thing this confirms is that out Walter Mitty profuse poster, Mr claiming to sell when the only sale that day has just been confirmed as being Ranjit, is definitely full of something.

Thanks for popping in non holder. That RNS obviously because he has finished selling IMO. There are 3 x instances of market abuse here, failure to notify in time of any selling, failure to notify of crossing the 4% boundary, and PDMR selling with knowledge of insider information.

Lol, I should look more at who is posting than just the posts.

Comment about news still applies as there has been good and not so good news.

And for our pernickity profuse poster who is clearly trying to cover up libellous comments, best advice I ever got from my late father was “don’t ever be a D1ck”.

Happy to pass that advice on ;-)

Except that statement of “a raft of bad news” Isn’t actually true and just shows up you motivation for posting so much, or perhaps some might conclude you are trying to cover your tracks for the libellous posts?

Just in the last week or so we have had a more than doubling of the bricklive events booked for next year, more BL events for 2022, Formula E for Feb 23 confirmed and today advanced discussions for a minimum of 5 KPOP festivals. And despite what anyone is trying to suggest, Frankfurt was an enormous success with over 65,000 tickets sold and for an inaugural event made a profit for everyone who funded it. So 5 concerts over the course of next year with better margins, sponsorship and streaming is really good news.

That’s total nonsense tintin. Frankfurt 22 sold more than 65,000 tickets. Get the format right, on the right day(Sunday is not the best night for a concert), with the right mix of acts (you need a better headline act) and kflex will sell out.

In the wake of the tragedy it could have gone either way, turn it into a tribute or postpone/cancel. With DC in Korea he will have been able to judge the mood better.

I’m encouraged that the planning for a European tour of a minimum of 5 events starting early next year is well advanced (must be otherwise the Nomad wouldn’t have allowed them to out that in).

“Looking forward, we will be working on bringing a number of K-pop events throughout 2023 for the loyal fanbase and will be announcing this programme through December. This is likely to be a full European Tour with a minimum of five events with the first event currently scheduled to commence in the first quarter.“

Of course there been dilution as covid has ravaged the original bricklive business, but there’s been the addition of 3 new divisions, so the company is effectively 4 times bigger than before (and with the potential of KPOP and formula e could be even bigger). So there’s no reason why this cannot get back to the previous highs and beyond. Currently priced to fail IMO, so even a small change in sentiment could lead to a big upswing. Similar companies over the same period (including those companies ramped by some of the trolls on here) have had very significantly more dilution in comparison. His many shares are now in issue in MOS or VAST for example over the same timeframe

Lol #awkward

Just a reminder from the RNS on streaming how revenue is generated. It was £15.99 last time of which LVCG got 60%. Last time the streaming was delayed because SBS controlled the timing, especially into Korea, but the O2 is not an SBS concert. Could the O2 be a big tribute concert, perhaps with a live streaming global fundraising effort for the families of the victims?

Revenue Generation

Revenue will be generated via a pay per view system with Doors retaining between 38.5 and 35% (dependent on volume of streaming tickets sold) of total net revenue (after costs) with Seoul Broadcasting Service (SBS) retaining between 1.5% and 5.00% and LVCG retaining the 60% balance.

LVCG will be responsible for any costs associated with the streaming rights with the artists and in country publishing rights. However, in the unlikely situation where revenues do not exceed costs the deficit will be solely covered by Doors.

You can’t tell exactly how many tickets are sold from the O2 site as it does not show how many are sold in the standing area. As to the seller, anyone selling at this level is taking a loss. Who knows why people sell, some people just get fed up waiting, or need the cash and can’t wait, but it’s clear that they don’t want to sell for less than 2.5p. But it does seem rather odd to be selling for a loss when the insiders are buying at higher prices and the new strategic investor Jason Lee has put £500,000 into the company of which £400,000 was in shares at 4gp.

Nonsense. At the investor call they were talking about having events all over Europe and further, and having those spread through the year.

There is a demand. Frankfurt proved that. Plus the brand will get bigger.

Plenty to play for on ticket sales, especially if this is turned into a focus for the itaewon tragedy. Might see more acts wanting to play to their fans in Europe and perhaps live streaming around the world with a fund raising element for the victims and families ?

Don’t disagree with that, they need to do much better in telling investors what all this is actually worth. Its a bit like the formula E RNS where thye could have said it was a 5 + 5 year contract, or that they get a fee for managing the event (including this year), or that the city of Cape Town paid for the track update, or that they have big partners in place for delivering the event, or that they have all the events of the efest. But they said none of that, no doubt thinking that investors can go back 2 years and string bits of information together. I and other keep going on to them about this, but the more that bend their ear about this the better

All bricklive rentals bring cash into the company do they not? And yes BL is currently a loss making division, but with 43% reductions in operating costs that could change. If you do the maths, with over 28 sets available, even rented at 50% of the year and at reduced rental rates, BL rentals can pull in £3 to £5 million a year. And it would certainly get worse if they weren’t getting any rentals. Todays RNS depending on the type and length of the rentals might be a very significant increase in revenue coming in for next year (but from what I’ve seen, it’s normally the big blockbuster tours that get rented out early, and those tend to be rented for a whole season). Trouble is we won’t know that until later as those whom they rent them to generally keep an embargo on the news until much closer to the time. In previous years having 10 rentals for the next year at this stage is slightly better than previously I believe.