Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
Furion, I'm in for about the same.
Good luck, everybody, let's hope our patience is rewarded.
On potentially raising funds, let's remember that they got some backing from institutional investors after going private, thanks to Alex Snow, so they do have some decent runway still, and doubt these investors are in for a 5-10% return.
>So it looks like they may relist. But when? And as has been said on this board, they'll probably fund raise.
I remember writing something like 'see you all in 2025' when it de-listed, looks like could be right. I think if we all survive to the end of this year, US elections could drive market sentiment quite a lot, and it will be more favourable to activity again.
Thanks!
Hope so too, otherwise, it's a bit ugly. As I understand, the concert party are protected from any dilution as they can issue equity to themselves however much they want (maybe I'm wrong?). What gives me a bit of hope is wondering if the NHS Trusts and other such similar holders are equally protected in this way - were they given some special assurances by Snow and others, that they are protected from dilution?
Best case scenario - consolidation is a sign of them getting their affairs in order and opening up shop to public trading again.
What's the consolidation factor? My position is on freetrade, so had no correspondence.
And how do you read that action? It did get a bit clowny with the number of shares they had, so consolidating to make more attractive to institutional investors?
>JA owns over double that number. He has also lost a lot of weight recently and looks great.
Rebuked the weight and the number shares, but not that he's a scammer. "Hey, he swindled me out of my money, but he's a handsome fella, so I'm happy to fund his Monaco lifestyle"
Not been invested for years, but does anyone remember something like 2 years ago now, a raise to keep equipment, as he put it, in 'drill-ready state'. Look up the Jan 14 RNS, 2022, search for ' drill-ready state'.
Bought something from Superdry last year, while also following this space. The store service was probably one of the best I've ever experienced (sales colleague was helpful and available when asked, despite being busy with multiple customers, but also not too clingy or pushy), and quality of the stuff I bought was good.
What surprised me is the complete absence of focus on the range and brand purpose. I feel that most successful brand would usually have a dominating category, and then have limited exposure in others to complement, but they have so many items competing for the same spot, i.e. 'hoodie', 'winter jacket' etc. And why should anyone buy Superdry shoes over literally any other shoe brand? Some choice is good, but not to the point of hindering website navigation, and overall confusion. Not a marketing person, but feels like that's at the core of their struggles somehow.
Mostly feel sorry for people like Cornish who provided some real value-added insight and many times put their foot forward to stand up for the BoD. Never underestimate the extent of human psychopathology, I guess. Good luck to those 'people' taking that money to the afterlife, hope they choke on it.
Black on white:
https://docs.grantthornton.ca/document-folder/viewer/docul8LWsxcWho7J/4880856620380763689
Page 9
[34] The purchase price is insufficient to pay out all secured creditors. The unsecured creditors receive nothing.
Amazing, isn't it, that the filter has no problem with poo (Liverpool), but does have with ars3.
Https://www.torys.com/en/our-latest-thinking/publications/2023/04/bc-court-refuses-to-grant-a-reverse-vesting-order
The Court echoed the judicial view that RVOs are not the norm and should be granted only in extraordinary circumstances. Building on recent RVO decisions such as Harte Gold, Quest University Canada and Just Energy Group Inc., the Court recognized that heightened scrutiny and diligence must be applied to RVOs because they lack many of the key statutory safeguards that normally provide economic stakeholders with a “voice” in the debtor’s restructuring.
Relevant reading on reverse vesting orders through a case study of another failed Canadian miner:
https://www.blakes.com/insights/bulletins/2022/below-the-surface-a-deeper-look-at-harte-gold-and
Mirror announcement now out by Rambler:
https://www.ramblermines.com/storage/press-releases/rambler--press-release-08-31-23-1693502805.pdf
Stop spamming and wait for the Rambler announcement.
The entire thing was written in award-worthy extra-chromosome legalese.
My favourite part:
On completion of the Acquisition (Completion), the Rambler Group shall retain all Target Assets owned as of the date of the Subscription Agreement and any assets acquired by the Rambler Group up to the date of Completion but excluding those assets, liabilities and contracts specifically excluded by the Company pursuant to the terms of the Subscription Agreement
>>> So, once the acquisition of Rambler assets is complete, Rambler RETAINS all assets that were sold to AUT? How does that even work? Was there really absolutely no way for a legal professional or a NOMAD to phrase this clearer? Was this really the utmost optimal choice of words in the entire universe of possible permutations?
"• The purchase comes with +A$250M of infrastructure, including an accessible decline,
extensive underground development, a 650m shaft, processing plant, port infrastructure
and adjacent hydro power"
And they gave it away for nothing. No words. Wouldn't be surprised if Bradfart Mills has some connection to the chairman of the acquiring company.
Oh wow. That's the best they could get? Embarrassing.
Well, we can also speculate as to why they did not specify the offer amount. Or at least state the reasons why this cannot be disclosed just now.
Guess we'll find out either way - 21 more sleeps. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Disregard. Look at his post history. It's like a slightly more literate moon.