Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
erazzel: we already have a shareholders' group who have repeatedly tried to contact the Company. The group was formed in an orderly way with members having to prove their shareholdings (I think; unless my memory is playing tricks again). They contacted the Company in a polite proper manner but were pretty roundly ignored (again please correct me if I am wrong). So this path has already been trodden and failed alas.
RichieR: my understanding of where we are is as follows; although I am happy to be corrected of course if I am incorrect!
The company is now delisted so the shares have no market for them to be traded in, so the only way any of us could currently buy or sell them would be in a private transaction, although that would be a risk as we have been kept completely in the dark by the company as to what is going on so have no idea what they could be worth.
At the point of delist there were 15.761billion shares issued of 17.25billion authorised.
They could have issued the difference in the meantime without telling us which would have further diluted our shareholdings, but they should not be able to issue shares beyond the authorised level without our approval.
There are a number of potential outcomes from here as I see it:
1. we never hear a dickie bird from them - this is unlikely and illegal as we are shareholders.
2. the company goes into administration or liquidation - we would be told this by the administrator or liquidator as appropriate and we would in all likelihood have all lost our investments.
3. the company continues to exist as a private company - this is what has happened to date and the company has seemingly abused requirements for agms and publicising statutory accounts along the way. If this continues we will remain in limbo until one of the other potential outcomes happens.
4. the company returns to market - this would require a complete u-turn in the way it is being currently run as there would be obligations to do the above requirements to satisfy the regulators but there would then be a marketplace for the shares and we could all sell, hold or buy more(!).
5. the company is sold/taken over, either fully or partially - if this happened we would get to vote on the proposal and receive the subsequent pay off if a majority voted in favour.
I cannot think of any other possible outcomes so if others know of any please do elaborate.
It's possible there is good reason for the company's on-going silence, although not being able to give us any update at all seems implausible. It would hopefully be inappropriate to write this off just yet as they are continuing to spend millions in legal costs.
Hope this helps...
GLA
Lady mapp: your devotion to the LSE board is undoubtedly "exceptional" although I am sure many of us prefer it wasn't.
Your contribution is not exceptional. Being kind, the best it could be regarded as is sweetly deranged, but completely irrelevant and a pollutant to the board, only rivaled by RainbowRider.
Keep smiling :).
Frustrating to see you guys having a run in over a misunderstanding. Given tsbs is such an honest long standing stalwart of this board and Looed has worked tirelessly on our behalf, I hope that you both get to share a conciliatory celebratory pint one day with me (my treat).
LSE must be backed by a Russia (in some form) as it continues to permit Maxcady to post his bile.
Coggy: since the sun has just come out here in Lyme, why not :).
RR: this is a forum to discuss Frontera, not who the next Tory leader will be. Posts like yours, mapp's and maxcady's just serve to dilute relevant posts with mindless pollution.
Have you nothing better to do?
Reported.
Coggy: thank you for the reminder to report it's posts, which I have now done. Not that lse do anything about it...
Have a good weekend all :)
Well done Jim Slade and thanks for sharing.
It is similar to a reply I received from them on 1 December 2020, that I shared on here at the time.
It contained the following sentence: "We are currently in the process of constructive change and will be communicating with you about the company's progress."
So they've added "near future", which I guess is progress from over 19 months ago!
Fingers crossed they're good for their word this time...
GLA
Madp: I am currently enjoying reading Bob Mortimer's autobiography, whereas I am not enjoying your nit picking of Looed. You have more than made your point so can I suggest that, in the words of Bob Mortimer, you "let it lie".
And away :)
Congratulations on 6,000 posts of drivel Lady mapp
Which we have all read on the net or on the app
We all know many times over you're an oap
Who loves to attempt poetry
Living down Bournemouth way
We all hope to be celebrating with you one day (Rodney)
RR: where did you get this information? Are you sure? There's nothing in their statutory accounts that says this. Please elaborate.
"Njames". Apologies: flippin autocorrect.
Names: one day we will all find out how loyal he really is...
Mick: the next elections in Georgia are set for 2024 I believe.
Happy Birthday Zeps.
I am precisely 10 years behind you!
This time each year I wonder whether we will be still here the next year ... and we always are!
RR: so you're happy to quote "leading climate change researchers" when it suits you having 15 minutes previously dished their views on ... hmmm ... climate change!
I really must stop reading your posts and get a life!
Tsbs: I reported it too, so great minds think alike ... although I am sure it was you whose report dealt the killer blow ;).
Mapp: your local MP won't be concerned about standards: he's a Tory.
Maxcady: for the first time since you posted your antagonistic drivel, I agree with you.
Yes, it will have serious consequences for Georgia: seriously good consequences :) as the US will ensure it is protected which will likely include encouragement to SMs to invest in extracting the oil and gas.
Now please do one in case you post anything else I agree with as that prospect makes me sick.