Member Info for MrHumble

We could rubbish them. But i thought about that on their behalf. Well, if they are smashing big markets, even giving prices where massive funds will pile in etc - i think that will sort perception for the little ones

As for moi - can't be bothered with the forums now. Must have missed out on 15K last week alone, rabbiting instead of looking

GLA

I actually admire their approach. They never seem to have a concluding opinion. Just present flow charts of transcript pieces of relevance - be it RNS or IM's etc. The underlying informed market by data as it rolls during those windows, and so on. The prices that the informed will dump at or buy at according to flows leading to

I like it because it if anyone calls it rubbish they look stupid, due to everything they print coming directly from market data, board member's gobs etc etc

I couldn't make a short case for here like they could. Nor a buy case.

It's one of those scenarios in presentation. Nothing could convince market otherwise.

I think they waste such talent being a secret society. It's time to bring them above ground

I know lots of Americans. On the likes of substack from day 1 (not publicly). They track everything going on around markets on it, from feeds to internal chats (all on their databases for future uses). A lot of them short so they like to track what gerbils are being sold - which led to many accidental discoveries lol

The point is net, there are no secrets. And i have (i think), managed to convince them to go public on the likes of that, but with data PI's never really even came across before, in real market or probably even in theory for most.

It's going to be a hoot

Net, future good news or bad, you will be able to reflect on the medium term history, and see bad intent all the way.

A highly informed market operating in a very false market.

Very rare on AIM for that to lead into amazing news. So far it's led into awful news

Let’s be honest , for most investors, the entire investment case here was Croda. All the other stuff isn’t just noise or bits and bobs keeping the lights on. The company is making year-on-year losses, so those smaller revenue streams aren’t meaningful. That means anything to do with Croda is material by default. Whether they’ve received big royalties or nothing at all, it directly impacts the share price, so this information should have been included in the last trading statement at the very least, if not in a separate RNS announcement. The failure to update the market properly creates a misleading picture, especially when the company communicates informally shall we say (the positives), rather than clear, regulatory-compliant disclosures. This ongoing silence or vague communication supposedly due to an NDA means investors are left guessing, resulting in a false market and a clear breach of a few rules imo.

Don't know what the NOMAD is doing, esp given recent disasters like the croda numbers fiasco.

When you think about it, no royalty cheques or little to nothing in one, is in this instance market sensitive? Given it is basically 95% of the reason anyone is or was buying here rather than 1% , in my mind, it makes it material so there should have been a market update on numbers regardless really

But i do get how there is no no need to report that in legal terms

What did he actually say on June 30th?

RNS just says as expected lol. Says nothing about NDA bound so had to break his assurance of numbers (also not in an RNS)

Starting to sound like you lot are getting seriously played off - radar? i dont know

Has Ashman actually said he cant disclose material financial info due to the NDA? Unsurprisingly, i cant see it in any RNS

Ignorance is no defence

Ashman cant claim 'there was no carve out - i thought i was legally obliged to total secrecy'

Well even we know that's not the law, never mind the lawyers that go over it lol

Im afraid whilst the silence may suit the gossip columns, it is factually exposing the truth

Nada from Croda

But just don't mislead yourselves

No update? Nothing worth knowing then. No payment or very small, from Croda.

It's a black n white fact - the law basically gives you the fact

You cant hide behind an NDA for material info

You can only hide behind it for immaterial info - example, paid nothing or little - no need disclose that

i disagree with that. I think both should be reportable when an NDA is involved. That way no mislead can occur through silence

Every NDA should have a carve out. Something like: “Nothing in this agreement shall prevent a party from disclosing information where such disclosure is required by law, regulation, or the rules of a recognised stock exchange (including AIM Rules and UK MAR).”

If a carve out is not in the NDA? It's irrelevant. Basically you should know the law anyway, and the fact that no bounds of secrecy override a carve out clause, even if not in a contract

If a company is claiming it can’t disclose material financial information due to an NDA, it's basically avoiding transparency, which could raise concerns with the AIM Regulation team or investors. In this instance, just investors? i dont think an RNS says 'wont disclose material financial information due to an NDA'

If i remember right, it says something like 'will report it at the relevant time?' Something like that?

Yeah, if ever get any material payment lol

Don't know why this comes up every week. The law is clear with no ring roads on this matter

Exactly.. so obviously nothing material for SBTX

Another interesting one (checked after toyin mentioned 10% of total revenue), is that if you know a payment is due from last or current accounting period, factually - example got a sales and usage report from Croda but not the money yet, he would still have to inform you of that as well.

An NDA can't block material financial information. So no, he isn't sitting on material info that is classed as inside dealing if he buys. That would only apply during negotiation phases which are long concluded here given royalty %s already declared and so on.

He can buy no problem at all

You can only delay the numbers, if they are not of a material amount. Or if withholding them is not misleading market

Be breaking the law if currently withholding material payments

So that leaves one question - is withholding immaterial numbers misleading the market? Looks like. But illegal? No

They have little choice. 0 to nearly 2% short on CRDA in no time at all. The powers are coming after them

You have to wonder what their next report will be