Member Info for pbody

I think the infrastructure is there alright, along with the aluminium processing not far away the need to supporting flame ******ant materials with aircraft spec raw material that allow traceability may well kickstart or increase some more production of.foams/cloth/plastics etc closer to the roaster or have other unforeseen spinoffs. its the economies of scaling up can be tricky to estimate and I can imagine there being better than expected results there was my point. especially when they can't see the inefficiencies at the start.

I mean its quite a lot of output 15 or so full trucks out per day....once there at that figure it might be more of a margin it's hard to tell early on with lack of efficiency. did they mention anything about power lines into the site or being connected....or the switchgear delays? but its looking on the up......

it wasn't meant for that. I think odey is a ltd company...registered companies as far as am aware don't HAVE to register believe it or not. but your are right it is getting closer.

It was meant as general info for anyone investing in the market. There might be some running (lucky or not) very very small caps too who aren't aware of this. It was from a conversation I had years ago with someone. It was a general comment about oversight and the problems that can occur should some investors be less than honest. For example: Wassat, GBoycott or F.E. if you have invested past 3% would you feel obliged to let them know? and again at every whole percentage point? The AIM sheet is not very clear at best (I thought it was 5% from memory). The last thing you want to happen is someone with a large sum of money investing in a firm or worse still putting in a 200k or 500k sum repeatedly from an illegal or overinflated or self fabricated source (and then getting caught for whatever it is their doing) then whatever the best intentions are of the firm they can't prove there were fully transparent with the other shareholders with that information handed to them. There are a lot of very very small caps that don't post that info and their investors probably wouldn't have known to have it handed it to them. Sadly the Aim sheet seems to make it more of a meal of it than it should. It's not the business savvy or honest people with a lot money that are the problem......the example I remember from years ago was if a pyramid scheme (or what seemed to be a crook) with regular payments in, kept increasing their stake were would it lead?

having thought a bit more it's probably the laundering that means they want disclosure of any change. continuously.

I think it reads notification to the AIM company from the shareholder (s) and then on the RNS (RIS in that print as its older), but it is transparency based concept and if I remember the conversation I had a long time ago was brought about because of money laundering though the AIM and the AIM listed firm being unable to wash its hands and not look like being part of it. If its reported there isn't much more the can do I think is the theory. As a rough figure. at the moment anyone with over around 75,000-90000 in has to report it and if it goes up or down by a percent they have to report again....and again......and again.....that AIM17 isn't easy to understand off the sheet.

I hope this link comes out. https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwidvYj975naAhVpKcAKHfYKAqwQFggsMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fuk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com%2Fw-009-1710&usg=AOvVaw00kTWAf1PXLwN_5LXL-CIL its a long link. but it simplifies what the aim rules are saying. tell me it it doesn't work I will try again. is about transparency. and ANY change above 3% needs reporting. i'm not surprised some can't figure it from the AIM guidance. that why they employ corporate lawyers..........i'm not pointing fingers but I think from what you have said and my dealings with other listed firms with large shareholders some have overlooked this......

that is where I think you are wrong. once above the 3% you are into an area where you have to declare that % change. at every whole percentage point up or down. anyone or group that who holds above 3%. that's why its done. actually it said it must be reported immediately in the aim listings guidance. as far as I am aware I am correct. I will have a look and post it when I find it, it took a while for me to think that with the new issue and large holdings, it was something someone said to me years ago. I thought it was 5% but it turns out its a 3%.

fe: perhaps you are right and they have maintained their holdongs within +/- 1% and info will be released later but that would have been tricky after the OO with the qty of shares issued. and really, as its been since jan. they should have disclosed by now.....its not really like they should come out with....ohh I forgot! I think you (probably along with everyone else here) would agree that disclosing that sort of info should happen fairly quickly (i.e. within a week) not every quarter or at years end.......

of course its the same the other way. at 53.5% if it went to 53$ or at 52$ and so on it has to be reported. as does anyone else who holds above a 3% holding......so if there were any large holdings moving it is easily identified. i am trying to point back to RE:FE from a few days ago and was wondering over the last few years would there not have be more notifications on the RNS? had there been more "hovering" going on?

its the part after the brackets...... and any increase or decrease in holdings past any single percentage point. now I cant remember the exact figures. but say they originally held 53.5% when it reached 54% they have to report. again at 55% and 56% and so on all the way to 65% or whatever. I haven't seen that.

Had a look and according to AIM rule 17: A holding of 3% or more in any class of AIM security (excluding treasury shares) and any increase or decrease in such holding through any single percentage point. Should there not have been more notifications on the RNS?

in previous post please read "that" as "that's"...depends if I have my glasses on and hit the right keys.....pity there's no edit facility on here....having to post again.

Thank you, I honestly thought on a listed company there needed to be disclosure of holdings for every 3 or 5% rise in stock. Perhaps that a conversation with someone in the past best forgotten and I look in the Aim rules for a bit.

I think the longer run of sunshades have gone in the top photo from the car park. When I used to contract it was usually 100+ ours per week, week in eek out. Its nice they thought of the guys there. It just seemed unusual to remove something and waste man hours if your on an install. Perhaps they didn't want a car park bun fight or fall out with 300 odd workers turning room for about 30 with sunshades. I dont know. The principle behind F.E. is sound although maybe not towards TSTR, if I knew where he gets his figures from or perhaps he would rather not say I don't know. Buying low and selling high is a great idea, but it would have payed to sell all before the OO issue date and then bought back again just after. I hope you enjoy your golf. I wonder what your handicap is? Personally I always found the game best when with friends carrying 2 clubs round each. Trust me give it a try. People might think your a newcomer or not playing with a full set but "if" you enjoy golf and aren't just competitive you might find it less of a waste of a walk than you think. I honestly hope there is value increases markedly (in the long term I think it will) but the value of the original shares has been diluted somewhat with the OO and not saying this to try and protect against it happening again should the same situation rise again with lack of capital isn't protecting anything, it is something to be wary of in the short term.....

3/4 of total. easy to find when you know here to look. I think I am straight as a dia......but you may well think I am both. l dont suppose it will be long before the financial results will be published? my guess is after the bank holiday.

just as an aside whist hopefully i have a chance, not relating to tstr just a general enquiry, as a few seem knowledgeable on board decisions if not in agreement on figures...... is there a threshold for a company to be wound up or delisted or taken over or diluted if new shares are issued on the aim or other markets? i always assumed its 51% of voting but that's perhaps a niave assumption. i tried for the last 3 hours to find an answer on the internet but it didn't really give me any actual set value only examples where delisting occurred. for example Marconi? or carillion?

how did you come by the figure of 41,604,912,988? and could you please repeat the threshold percentage to take private if you remember it?

there is a couple of questions I haven't figured out completely and i wonder if i can get an agreement. what is (at present) the total cost put into the site and by whom? when they start shipping the ore what is the expected price per tonne per location carry included? what would be the expected price per tonne profit should they have spare capacity and decide to offer that as a service on the market. i know dollar fluctuations/raw material/transport costs are hard to predict but at present prices.

I will be honest, I had some questions and was new on here, which is why I joined. its been to a greater or lesser extent been helpful getting to some peoples thoughts and answers to questions I had on here (apart from not getting any help trying to find out about shorting stocks) whish I had to do elsewhere......and strangely on that board it took 3 asks before you could get a straight answer. it is easy to bull yourself into a position that you believe is right just as easily as it to be left bear feeling you should stay away. your opinions about the future direction that will be taken could be as hard to see as if its a second or third roasters or furnaces that are going in. you are both more informed that I am. personally, 2+2 in my case =99 as some seem to be accountants. but you have probably heard that joke before. I can only thank you both for taking some time to answer most of my questions