Member Info for OmnesInvest

@ YOLO47
So I have advised my sister to Invest her profits from a Propery sell...... we invested at 4.3p. A 6 figure sum. Need to say she is not happy and very nervous......

What shall do or say to her????? I still believe in RMS.... but ?!?!?? Help plz
___________________________________________________________________________________
Have patience! This is a real business, with real products and individuals engaged in the business that want to see it gorw. ALL the fundamentals are in place to get the product manufactured and marketed.

There has been some selfish sales by the Directors but I agree with the bulk of sensible writers on this forum. There has got to be an announcement of both a more legal tie-up with Volz, plus other distributors and/or manufactuers world-wide and of course SALES contracts!

The P2P mask is unique, it does have its place in the market, not just for COVID-19 but also for mulitple other applications. I speak as someone who has 35 years of sales, product development and marketing experience + 25 years investing, rather than trading.

I am now running a small loss, but my focus is on the reality of a product that HAS been developed, will start production in the next 10 - 20 days and will start selling.

I have no doubt this will move to the 15p - 25p range before year-end and almost certainly higher.

@ OL27
Hi guys, new here to :) been invested/following this stock for a while. Looking into Buying and holding this stock till summer next year, Any advice/thoughts on what will happen from here on??
_____________________________________________________________________________________

The Pandemic could never have been planned for but the BoD are shrewd and highly experienced. Their plan with the debt restructuring is based on Cinemas opening in May 2021 which is good judgement. I could see a rights issue early 2021, but I think this business is now well-funded and can now plan to start revenue again.

Long-term thinking required but buying now should see a significant increase >50% of investment over the next 6 months. CINE will definitely form part of my 2021 growth portfolio. I have held off until their funding was agreed and in place. Time to buy is now. Time to sell.....12 months from now.

Just my opinion. Your own research is needed!

@georgieexpat. Excellent rational POV. Thank You. 100% agree

_____________________________________________________________________

A few things to calm any nerves over the weekend.

No way the BOD can sell P2F without a shareholder vote.

Trev and Paul can get away with selling their shares at an opportune time for themselves, but they can’t get away with acting outside the directors professional code of conduct - they could end up in prison, then they’d be spending their new found millions on spice and snout.

There is most likely a big new buyer in the background. Rules state they have 2 days to inform the company they have passed thresholds and the company has 3 days to inform the market. So 5 days. Most likely these communications back to let someone buy in big time while the price stays low with many first time/nervy PIs willing to comply (it’s morally questionable, but it’s within the rules). We’ll likely find out Monday almost definitely by Tuesday.

Paul Ryan was selling lots of stock at 5.1p on Monday. If someone has amassed more than 30% of the stock then they will have to make us all an offer for our stock at 5.1p minimum assuming they bought on Tuesday at that price.

Absolute worst case scenario. Is that Paul Ryan triggered a share price decline and they started buying up around the 3.9p that Braveheart averaged their sale at (and that’s a weighted average so we have to assume they sold either side of that).

If you want to delist a company or take a controlling stake once you have taken 30% of it you have to offer to buy out all shareholders at a price no lower than the highest price you’ve paid for a share in the last 12 months.

And frankly if this product is going to the moon and someone has taken more than 30% the smart strategic play is offer everyone the year high of 7.2p so everyone gets the hell out of dodge quickly and you go off into the sunset to make billions.

SO if there is a TR1 on Monday with a greater than 30% stake expect the market to keep the price down so they can buy cheaper shares on the open market from inexperienced investors who don’t know the rules. If that happens and you sell - you’ll kick yourself.

@sundrem -
Maybe the conditons in the HoA with Volz stipulated that BH, TB and PR are out? German Mittelstand Company built based on sustainable and inventive product Portfolio and ethicks. Ideal fit to Dr GC and RMS product portfolio. IMHO. What do I know. Only an Engineer.

I00% agree with you! This is my own judgement too, but I believe very strongly that BH, TB & PR should have been more transparent about it. The move to place P2P into RMS in the first place did not make strategic sense, but hindsight tells us the what the 'intent' was.

IMO, BH had insufficient ££ to invest in their other companies and TB & BH could not raise the cash needed. Therefore they pumped, dumped and ran off into the sunset!

All will come good in the next 1-3 months, but that is not the point! BH should have and could have been transparent!

Integrity over Profit is more important!

Thank you for your support @rebel100 and @Jarv55

Some have been critical of those posting at what are seen as complaining over losses. I dis agree with them and have just added this.

I do not agree with you!

TB and PR are 100% wrong in what they did, the way they did and their intent! They did not give a damm if shareholders won or lost!

This has ZERO to do profits or loss, it is to do with the fact that TB was a major shareholder of 3 x PLC's and that is a conflict of interest!

I am neither at a loss or a profit, but that is not the point. If I had made 1000% profit, I would still go after TB & Co. What they have done is pure greed, selfishness and arrogance.

Lets get one fact right....Braveheart was under serious pressure as their investments outside of P2P are worth little according to their OWN ACCOUNTS!!

Trevor Brown needs investigating and he needs to speak up!!

100% Morally wrong, it is whether it is legally wrong. It would be a hard case to prove in a court but the evidence is in plain sight.

What I do know from 35 years corporate and SME business experience is this.

If I came to TB with a business that monitored wind turbines and had an Info Sec product/consultancy and said I have a unique mask.....I can guarantee with almost definite certainty that in any other situation TB would NOT put a MASK business with that business.

THAT is the issue I have. What TB did was selfishly put 3 businesses together that have zero relation to each other and then sell the damm thing.

TB controlled RMS and controlled Braveheart - there is a conflict of interest. TB walks away with c. £20M all because not one person could stop him.

Pure selfishness, greed and it must be looked at because as a director, he has got to to do what is best for his shareholders.

The debate here is WHICH SHAREHOLDER??? He could not satisfy both and ended up screwing 1 over the other.

He could have done what he did and NOT screw over shareholders but he chose to go for the money first. Then again, if you look at his earning out of all his businesses, it is not much! If you look at the cash that Braveheart have it is not enough to invest in the other 6 businesses.

I am of the view that Braveheart was screwed, as an investor had let down their investees and the only way out of it was to sell the shares in the one business they knew could raise money.

This whole situation stinks and I have already written my letters. Lawyers will be brought into this in the next 1-2 weeks.

I do not agree with you!

TB and PR are 100% wrong in what they did, the way they did and their intent! They did not give a damm if shareholders won or lost!

This has ZERO to do profits or loss, it is to do with the fact that TB was a major shareholder of 3 x PLC's and that is a conflict of interest!

I am neither at a loss or a profit, but that is not the point. If I had made 1000% profit, I would still go after TB & Co. What they have done is pure greed, selfishness and arrogance.

Lets get one fact right....Braveheart was under serious pressure as their investments outside of P2P are worth little according to their OWN ACCOUNTS!!

Trevor Brown needs investigating and he needs to speak up!!

100% Morally wrong, it is whether it is legally wrong. It would be a hard case to prove in a court but the evidence is in plain sight.

What I do know from 35 years corporate and SME business experience is this.

If I came to TB with a business that monitored wind turbines and had an Info Sec product/consultancy and said I have a unique mask.....I can guarantee with almost definite certainty that in any other situation TB would NOT put a MASK business with that business.

THAT is the issue I have. What TB did was selfishly put 3 businesses together that have zero relation to each other and then sell the damm thing.

TB controlled RMS and controlled Braveheart - there is a conflict of interest. TB walks away with c. £20M all because not one person could stop him.

Pure selfishness, greed and it must be looked at because as a director, he has got to to do what is best for his shareholders.

The debate here is WHICH SHAREHOLDER??? He could not satisfy both and ended up screwing 1 over the other.

He could have done what he did and NOT screw over shareholders but he chose to go for the money first. Then again, if you look at his earning out of all his businesses, it is not much! If you look at the cash that Braveheart have it is not enough to invest in the other 6 businesses.

I am of the view that Braveheart was screwed, as an investor had let down their investees and the only way out of it was to sell the shares in the one business they knew could raise money.

This whole situation stinks and I have already written my letters. Lawyers will be brought into this in the next 1-2 weeks.

https://twitter.com/LilianGreenwood/status/1326503366889967617

Dear Sirs
I believe that Trevor Brown (TB) and Paul Ryan (PR) need investigating with respect to their fiduciary duties as directors and shareholders of RMS plc. There is an unquestionable conflict of interest when majority shareholders of 2 x PLCs make decisions that positively impact one group and negatively impact others. I am sure you are fully aware of the RMS plc situation and how their share price increased over 600% in the space of c. 14 days and then TB and PR have sold more than £20M of shares in RMS plc despite their alleged long-term investment commitments.
The facts of the case are as follows

1. BRV have 6/7 other investments all of which are valued at almost £0 and have £625,000 cash in the bank at the last set of accounts

2. Braveheart Investments owned c. 27% of RMS plc.

3. Trevor Brown and/or BRV was the largest single shareholder and director of all 3 companies. Conflict of interest

4. Braveheart Investments owned c. 52% of Pharm2Farm Ltd (P2P)

5. RMS has 2 business units, remote monitoring of wind turbines and Information Security Consulting Firm.

6. Pharm2Farm Ltd is a scientific food nanotechnology business, with an exciting development in applying that nanotechnology into a unique anti-viral face-mask.

7. BRV "sold" P2P to RMS plc. Conflict of interest since TB is a large shareholder of both companies

8. RMS plc has nothing to do with nanotechnology or Face-Masks. Why was P2P "sold" to them?

9. RMS share price increases by 600% due to news of a world-first anti-viral mask

10. BRV sell more than £20M of shares in RMS plc making a profit from what I understand of 1,500%

11. RMS shareholders lose money due to share price plummeting as 400M shares are sold in the space of 4 days w/c 16 November 2020

12. As of 20 November, BRV have a market cap of £15M and cash reserves of £18M

13. As of 20 November, RMS share-price is down over 500% in less than 10 days from the price at which BRV sold their shares

14. Trevor Brown and Paul Ryan and personally benefited through what can only be currently described as a "pump & dump" operation.

15. The second-largest shareholder and founder of P2P, Dr Gareth Cave tweeted earlier this week that his personal views would remain to himself but that he would not be selling a single share

16. Dr Gareth Cave is a shareholder but not a Board Director

BRH sold for a reason, and it is not purely ££

I am of the view that a special dividend will be made and the largest shareholders will make a fine retirement pot which IMO is where the BoD need to be!

6 x Investments that are valued at Zero......1 investment that can drive revenue and they sell it?

Short-term thinking and a flawed strategy!

100% agree. TB and PN are unable to make impartial judgement and yet the harsh reality is, they could still both own less than 3% each and not declare it!

The commercial aspect of this from a Braveheart perspective is what it is. The morality of what has been done is flawed due to the lack of transparency of actions they KNEW

100% agree! The details are important.

P2P have gone as far as to develop/re-design a machine that will specifically manufacture THEIR masks and around 5m per month.

One of the most credible interviews I have heard in years and represents the antithesis of interviews by the Braveheart BoD

I understand why Braveheart sold off, but the conflict of interest on TB's part is like a glaxon blaring on steroids!!

Too many shares and 2 or even 3 (IQ-AI) Board Direct roles makes the decision making process impossible! Braveheart have losses + too many investments that require £££ that they did not have.

P2P was "sold" deliberately with the intention of selling all the shares, that much is now clearly evident.

The BoD of which company, made what decisions, when and with what motive??

THAT is the question that needs answering. I am in support of an FCA investigation! Reply to this message if you are up for starting one.

BTW - I am in profit, so I have no ulterior motive. I believe that what Braveheart have done should have been and could have been far more transparent! Many have lost money and many are sitting on devalued shares.

Having been in corporate life and business for 35 years, for the first time ever, I am questioning how 1 individual can sit on the board of 3 x PLCs.....AND have large % stakes and be impartial. Add in that TB lives in Switzerland and is 71 years old.....it all adds up to an "intent" in August that meant nothing!!

Just saying!

This really is a stunning interview! Listening to it now while editing my Masters Thesis in International Law!

THIS is a serious business with unique edge on a product!

TB is being forced into a corner by something! The decision he and/or the Bod at Brave heart are making don't stack up commercially or strategically on the surface!

Watch this space for an announcement!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8959889/The-18bn-coronavirus-PPE-fiasco.html

There is more going on with Braveheart than we know and in my judgement, the problems are NOT with RMS but at BRV.
On paper, the RMS product set and P2P do not fit.
Some deal has been forced upon BRV for a reason that is as yet unstated.

RMS is the fallout kid, but is not the problem child. Why would BRV sell P2P to RMS in the first place?

I sense some "chess board" moves at BRV with directors and/or investors and/or their other investments being challenged.

Selling P2P makes commercial sense for RMS but does not make strategic sense at first glance.

I could see Trevor Brown leaving BRV! It might sound mad but.......connect the dots!

..........because City Rules means that Dr Cave cannot just "put out a statement" - what are some people like?

......and more importantly, City Rules means that Dr Cave cannot just "put out a statement" - what are some people like?

DTs get in the way of doing business - M/LTH will be rewarded.

This is not vapourware.....it is a product that is being CONSUMED by professionals and consumers alike in daily.

Your analysis is correct. What Paul Ryan is doing is not illegal, but he acting only in HIS personal interests and not the wider shareholder community! Self-serving IMO and that is not a nice trait for someone with authority in the business

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54974373