Member Info for Millertime

Newstate who told you that Barry and Ivan would still be attending / dialling in?

I assume it is still going ahead, all a bit unclear. I have contacted Ivan to see if he is attending, if he is going then so will I.

Just looked on the website and a general meeting is scheduled for tomorrow! It is on the left hand news section on 30th March. Maybe I had missed this before but this would seem to be the one that TW was on about. I have just spoken to my broker to take up my voting rights and will attend in person. If anyone else is able to attend (it's in Bedford) let me know

I welcome the chance to have an EGM so everyone can air their views as sounding off on here, whilst it may make us feel better, achieves nothing. It also stops Ivan receiving numerous calls and deciding that responding to PIs is not worth the effort, which to his credit he is still doing. Chris Potts is still involved along with Windsor and possibly Lenigas between them they have experience running firms and I believe that they won't put up with this for much longer before trying to effect change. The firm has at least £300k in the bank post Windsor,which could be used to diversify away from the Canadian operation and build something new and is an opportunity that shouldn't be passed up. Yes I agree it is a shambles but, assuming we can get a nomad, there is cash and enough people with know how to make something of value to give me some optimism. For all those who have shares we have the ability to make ourselves heard, contact your brokers to take up your voting rights and lets put on a show of force at the EGM to let everyone know that we are not going to stand for more of the same and that we deserve better. The company secretary (Intenational Registrars Ltd) can be reached using the contact details for Jeffreys (http://www.jeffreyshenry.com/contact-us).

My broker (Hargreaves) hasn't received anything to date. I left a message with the company secretary (part of Jeffreys) to give me a call today to discuss, will ket you know when I hear back. Anyone else checked with their broker?

A number of us have spoken with him and personally I have always found him prompt and genuine, which is one if the reasons I am still here. His phone number is on the RNS announcements

We certainly do seem to be on his radar. From a man who a few weeks ago made the company one of his tips of the year he certainly seems to be doing all he can to finish it off. I can only think that he must feel that he was misled by Ivan, or chose to hear what he wanted, and is now using the Ramsden angle to beat us with to try and save face after publicly backing the firm. What he originally labelled as city naivety is now incompetence and a disregard for the rules. And an honest man with a good track record is now labelled as a fraud. A number of people on here have lost money because they believed that TW had unearthed a good turnaround story, wouldn't it be a shame if they lost yet more as a result of one man's vanity to always have the last word and be proven right in the end. Personally he can huff and puff all have wants but if it is found that he has been actively seeking to sabotage our search for a nomad then he will have a lot of explaining to do.

If you own shares I suggest you attend the EGM, where you will be able to make your thoughts known to the BoD and participate in any motions proposed.

If the shares are delisted you would own shares in a private company, why would this be game over? Being delisted wouldn't be the worst thing in the world as it would vastly reduce the running costs of the firm, which mostly go on nomad and listing fees. If it went into administration then yes it would be a % distribution of cash once liquidation costs had been paid. Administration does not necessarily follow if the firm is delisted.

I imagine it will be put on the website in due course

If you hold shares through a nominee you may need to ask them to send it onto you, also make sure that you get the voting rights for your shares allocated to you so you can take part in the vote. I hold mine through Hargreavss and after speaking to then they put the EGM notice in the post to me so hopefully it should arrive in the next couple of days.

TW has just posted an article on Share Prophets, looks like the firm sent round an EGM circular without consulting Cairn, which was probably enough to result in the immediate resignation. Has anyone spoken to Cairn to verify this? Would appreciate it if you can let me know what is in the circular when you receive it as I imagine my broker will take a few days to forward it on.

I beg to disagree, if you think that a company is going under then you would rather hold debt as it gives you a better claim on the assets of the firm. Following recent conversions there is a small amount of debt outstanding and following the Windsor subscription more than enough cash to cover the £25k should the company cease to trade. http://uk.practicallaw.com/9-518-5211?q=&qp=&qo=&qe= Converting would indicate that the holder needed money and was forced to liquidate or thought that having the equity upside was preferable, albeit they could have converted at any point so this would suggest the former given the SP at the time..

Someone has paid a 100% premium to buy 1.5% of the company and at the sane time reduces the running costs of the firm giving to service the debt. All positive. When taken with the 210k subscription by an asset manager we seem to have some confident and well connected supporters.

The investment case, as far as I see it is as follows: An AIM shell seems to be worth about 750k, the market cap here isn't much more and when you factor in the cash on the BS the downside is limited. This is assuming that a new nomad is found, if so the SP will likely go back to 0.08 - 0.09 to reflect the value of the shell. As an ongoing business the cash on the BS gives the firm at least a year of operations in which to make a sale. Ivan gas been with the business for 6 months and has secured a contract already. The DD on the contract is in the bonds that INC will monitor, it is no reflection on the firm. The 300k will give at least another year of operations on top so the upside, assuming you believe in Ivan is huge. I agree that talk of 1p looks overly ambitious but I think that seeing 0.2 again in the next few months us more than achievable, which would represent a good return at these depressed levels.

Good, let them move onto the next big thing, I'm sure they'll be back with us before too long ramping and deramping. That's the problem with being a micro cap, it only takes a few people to move the price around. We are now back to where we were before TW's podcast following the nomad RNS. Let normality resume until the next RNS.

Hi SMS, When I spoke with Ivan he didn't know about the TW podcast. Given that TW seemed to be on good terms with him a few weeks agin when he was invested I am shocked that he didn't speak to him before releasing the podcast. I didn't ask him about Ramsden directly as I don't see this as an issue. Ivan controls the firm and the only links with Ramsden are holdings at a company that INC have a stake in. We influence them not the other way around, albeit we were hopeful of getting some business from them as well as a capital return in the investment at worst we have a chunk in a worthless Canadian firm that is more than outweighed by the recent Windsor investment monies. If anything it might be positive in the long run in that we have to make our own contacts rather than be dependent on a 3rd party. The company has enough cash for the foreseeable, minimal debt, following conversions, and assuming that a nomad is found INC can operate for a good while to come. This will give Ivan time to prove his deal making skills, which I believe is why a number if people invested here to begin with.

Hi SMS, I am a long term investor in the company, indeed I am limited by restrictions placed on me by my firm and as a result of my holding size, and try to give some perspective on the situation and address posts that I feel are over-estimated, whether that be optimistic or pessimistic as well as offer my opinion on developments. A lot of people on here are short term traders or pop up from time to time when they have a position and may be able to disproportionately influence people with their self-interested views so it is likely that there will be large price fluctuations and occasional rumours. Recent developments are indeed concerning and shareholders have every right in exiting. However, I believe that there is now limited down side in the share and still possibilities for the fortunes of the business to improve. Thanks to the research by many posters on this board I believe that the situation is not as dire as we believed at the close of trading on Thursday, whether this will result in a modest recovery on Tuesday is unclear but hopefully the price should at least stabilise and the spread return to normal levels during the next week. I am due to catch up with Ivan when he returns from his trip and will look to feedback anything that I am able to find out.

I think you will struggle to do so in any great size, I tried to get in at 0.04 on Thursday and there was no volume at all, the spread is quite large and I see no reason why the MM's will bring it in if people are still panic selling. However, on the plus side this does suggest that the larger shareholders are choosing to remain invested at the moment and that positive sentiment should see a sharp move north.

Ok, so INC owns some shares in a company that relies on IP owned by Ramsden. This represents a small amount of the firm's market cap and was done on the hope it would list in the future and to get preferential treatment for future monitoring business as a result of PPP. INC has some control over the running of a Canadian firm, there is nothing to show that Ramsden or the Canadian firm holds any sway over INC. Other than an investment which may not be worth what we paid, although that is by no means clear, I cannot see what the BoD have done wrong. A number of conversions and a large subscription have been done at 0.1p in recent weeks, which would have included a good amount of due diligence. If there were fundamental issues I believe that these would have been identified. The current SP undervalues the firm as a shell alone, let alone the cash and assets that are held with minimal debt. What am I missing?