Member Info for Minesinthemine

We can speculate all we want. What we have is the RNS’s which have been showing positive progress. And as another poster mentioned the change in accounting which if done properly wouldn’t have caused the suspension, hence that is rather disappointing, but is now deemed necessary.
We also know TW has asked the FCA to investigate, but we don’t know what actions of any have or are being taken.

Bottom line we shouldn’t have gone into suspension is the accounting changes were handled properly. We now are in suspension but according to the RNS will be out of it on or before 31st Jan. The business model remains the same, the partnerships continue to grow. My only concern is if there are any investigations going on on the background or anything else negative. But on face value, the company screwed up the process to change the accounting period, has to go into suspension to resolve and will be back next week after posting it’s accounts.

I have to stay positive as nothing has really changed, other than a knock of confidence that for a Fintech you would have hoped they knew what they were doing with accounting.

It's a horrible spead at the moment. Have been waiting for some funds to buy in and now that I have it's nearly 10% spread to buy.... Still seems like a good investment at these levels, but frustrating that even though the SP was higher a few days ago the buy price was roughly the same as the spread was less. Oh well....

Unfortunately I expect it to be bought out in the same way HGM will be.

Need to go and find another couple of gold mines now to move funds too....

Done well out of both POG and HGM just wanted a longer journey.

I’ve read stories the weekend about the Marshalls and other related ‘Profile 2’ related roles not being tested by F1.

Given all the publicity around F1, what a fantastic opportunity for Avacta to step in and offer tests. Volume wouldn’t be massive/costly but publicity could be great.

Just a thought.....

For me this share is not about the current a Covid-19 wave, people chasing the spike etc... If you read up on the companies website, the cancer drugs are to put it bluntly “life changing” in targeting the tumours. Assuming that Covid hasn’t slowed the cancer trials with partners (no RNS to state this), announcements relating to the cancer trials are on track to be announced later in the year. The fact that the technology and current crisis has given visibility of the company to wider audience is fantastic news and having friends and family and no doubt myself in the future unfortunately reliant on cancer drug advances I am enthused by both the money and publicity given to Avacta and hope it is leveraged. For me this is a sustainable company based on the many use cases for the technology and multiples of growth off successful cancer trials.

Trying to pick up some with HL and can’t get more than £500 worth.

Most brokers will handle the process. For example on HL there is an option to get them even in the app. It’s called Bed and ISA. The broker will do the sell and ISA buy transactions at the same time to minimise the spread/difference and generally only charge you one fee rather than a sell and buy fee. You may be eligible for CGT when you sell and for other shares e.g FTSE ones you are still liable for Stamp Duty on the ISA Buy portion of the transaction. (For GGP no Stamp applies though). It can sometime be frustrating when a share is very volatile as unlike a traditional buy or sell the Bed and ISA instruction is not implemented immediately. I tend to try and chance on a dip or spike and do it myself as I’m in control of the timing. For example last time I did a Bed and ISA with HL it took 4 days to execute.

Sorry all. In for £20k at 4.18. Just watch it drop now......

To me though does look to have some great potential.

GLA

I totally agree. The current BoD are being rewarded for failure and the investors are shouldering the cost of it.

Can’t afford to lose everything. Voted No with 800k but sold up another chunk.

GLA

Sorry to be dim again.....
HL Vote - 1 share one vote. The total number of share votes are added and which ever is Yes it No is the way that HL will vote in the SXX vote.

However for the SXX vote which is the 75% majority required. Are we saying that HL will simply apply their one vote based on their internal vote and that vote is worth the same as a shareholder with just 1 share who is able to attend the meeting in March?

So I read the details for HL as per below:

Please note that as your Shares are held in a pooled nominee account in the name of Hargreaves Lansdown, your vote will be amalgamated with those of other Hargreaves Lansdown clients. Each Share you vote on will count towards the total vote; however the Registrar will treat Hargreaves Lansdown as one Shareholder for the purpose of the vote.

What exactly does that mean? Is it basically irrelevant what I vote for as the registrar only counts HL as one vote?

Sorry I may be being dim, but what does it mean?

And hopefully the board would lose their jobs and CF wouldn’t get his $7m.

I’m voting no.

Childish - Yes
Reckless - Yes, but no more than the board have been with our investment.

Bottom line is that we all largely invested for two reasons:
1. To make money
2. To support a UK company that would sustain jobs, income, taxes for many many years to come

I’m sure some people were influenced by these forums but will also have been influenced by the company themselves, the BoD leading the company. They failed time and again to get the finance but were still happy to milk the investors at every opportunity and portray a future.

However it’s dead and I like others at the very least expect some level of accountability from the BoD. They failed, in any other walk of life they would have been relieved of duties. I do not blame anyone for my loss, but I am very angry that the people which are leading the company do not appear to have lost anything other than potential major wealth. Shares were issued without progress/completion etc... and they may well keep a job on the project.

This is just an example that life is not fair. I don’t for one minute think the situation will get better than it currently is or that CF is losing any sleep over what he has done. As far as he is concerned, the mine will be built, jobs have been created, he’s a success. To anyone who invested in SXX off the back of his leadership he’s a ________ (insert your own word)

I’m with you. I’ve lost even more. I am sick to death of people talking about blame. Yes I made the decision, yes I knew it was a gamble, there is no such thing as easy money or a sure thing, but the way CF portrayed the company the plan and his air of confidence, along with the fact it was just what this country needed sucked me in. I do feel somewhat aggrieved that the gamble has been our gamble not CF’s. As we’ve lost real money and he’s not actually lost anything other than potential returns. His time with the company was salaried, it was a job. I don’t understand why he and the rest of the BoD are still in post. In most other positions when you fail so catastrophically you would be removed. Since things showed sign of problems we had CF blaming me and other PI’s, just I’ll advised press. I couldn’t let go and sell up early despite the warning signs and have essentially written this off to zero. If it goes to vote I will reject the offer. (I actually think that despite the fact we have spent >£1Bn on the site, the offer given the liabilities such as Gina and investment required is relatively fair, but a little on the lower side). Is rejecting the offer spiteful, childish, bad sportsmanship because I’ve lost etc...100% absolutely and I admit that I don’t want CF to walk away with anything more. He should lose like I have. Sorry for other investors who call ill afford the loss, but I just don’t want CF to get anything more, he’s already bled me dry.

No news = no meaningful news
If they couldn’t sort the funding out in the years prior why is everyone hanging off the back of a comment made in the paper. The company said they are reviewing options, prioritising site work and cost mgmt. I am sure they were also hoping for some resolution to Brexit, but it has only been 6 weeks.

I posted several times that I would prefer a formal RNS confirming the work done to manage costs explained and confirm any other positive planning rather than spouting off in the press, but those who tie their form beliefs to informal dates and spell this out as fact of an RNS coming are not doing themselves or anyone else any favours.

Basically the PR team and Investor team should be working much smarter with the levers and tools they have and the board I would hope are working hard to secure the best result for the company.

News will come when we have some.

Great. So it is 1 month into their strategic review. It’s bweb commented on the jobs that have been axed to support the restructure. So why not put out a positive RNS refuting the ‘going private’ article and pushing out positives.

The fact the CEO currently seems happy about sounding out about misinformed PIs, BBs and that everything has been against him instead of being a CEO and taking some responsibility says it all really. Irrespective of the twisting of words by the DM I am still disappointed at the teams formal response and of our CEO’s musings in the press.

Technically on the 17th Sept SXX said they were no longer pursuing the bonds required for the JPMC funded option. However I believe that agreement is active until 31st October unless it has been formally closed off and no external announcement has been made.

The context may have been (given the time) relating to the Cornish Lithium Crowdfunding. In relation to that it may make sense, but with no strong rebuttal and no positive news and CF’s recent ‘woe is me’ interviews complaining about everything from PI’s, BB’s, lack of government support etc... the company need to get ahead of the negatives and drive positive affirmation that the 6 month plan is now entering month 2. Leaders should lead. CF needs to lead he’s the sodding CEO and at the very least his PR team need to protect the company if not himself. Come on SXX sort yourselves out, get some positive news out and hurt the haters and and shorters badly. We still have assets that people want, we need a partner to help us fulfil the demand.
Monday 7am get an RNS out position all the good work over the last 4 weeks in terms of cost prioritisation and ongoing site works and make it clear the company is still pushing to find partners to support the project and has time to do so (albeit a month less now).

As much as I want to believe it. I can’t see a government guarantee coming in the short term and if I’m honest I don’t think there should be. This is a private company whose attempts to raise funds have failed. There was a miscalculation on costs which changed the funding reqs. The funders don’t agree that the risk vs reward is worth the wait. Even with a guarantee from the government to allow us to sink shafts there is still risk in the process, so whilst everyone keeps saying this is not a government loan it is a guarantee, there are still significant construction risks to the build, hence there is risk to the treasury for the guarantee and they may be (currently are) unwilling to accept.

The numbers long term do however stack up and it is likely the mine will be completed, just a question of how much we manage to retain and if the UK govt retain any major tax income as it is also IMO likely the mine would be completed with foreign money and be foreign owned by the point it is delivering product. Hence jobs will come back, government will spin that they helped will spin what a fantastic UK resource POLY4 is etc.... but as a country we’ll miss out on Tax that we really need.

I don’t envy the government staff making these investment decisions but don’t see anything thus far which makes me think they’ll change their stance. Bailout of PIs isn’t what the funding/guarantees are for, but if it can be demonstrated through a new partner that the risk profile has significantly changed then maybe there is a chance albeit slim.