Member Info for PerArduaAdAstra

"likes interesting charts, short sellers...."
——-
Sounds like a sales pitch to me, and brings to mind a certain Yosser Hughes.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

“Where have the few on here viewed it if it's out?”
——-
Good morning, Mr.dt. I’ve only ever missed an announcement in the following link on one occasion in 10 years. And even then it may even have been my oversight.

http://www.investegate.co.uk/Index.aspx

Regards,

per ardua ad astra

Naturally I’ll have two of whatever ‘superleggera’ or ‘laurenlouise’ are having. Wouldn’t work any other way otherwise. Would love to meet ‘them’ at the bar though. Regrettably ain’t ever gonna happen is it? T*ssers.

per ardua ad astra

Sorry, Myo. For as much as we are both confirmed members of “Team Sirius”, reason demands I offer another perspective here. And that is that, for my part, I think you are chasing a fox that doesn’t exist.

Casapinos has every right to voice an opinion. And to be fair, the business experience you suggest he should be more humble about, is no less or more worthy, than the down-to-earthiness of your hedge trimming or Canadian raspberry breakfast. All give us an insight into the author, their views, hopes and perspective. And for my part, I very much appreciate the differences extant, that regardless, still find us all here.

Regards,

per ardua ad astra

Translation services. He says, sneering and laughing.

per ardua ad astra

Some would like to see Sirius succeed.
Some would like to see Sirius fail.
Some would like to see the Sirius share price rise.
Some would like to see it fall.

All have their reasons. Some perhaps more noble - and some certainly better financed - than others.

“all very unfortunate and unnecessary”
——-
Not if you’re an entity with deep pockets that might be interested in acquiring the holdings of the easily spooked.

Not that I’m suggesting this article - or others like it - was written on anyone’s behalf other than the readers’. Of course.

per ardua ad astra

An insightful and considered post, casapinos. Of course we all like to think we’ve got our eyes wide open - and I firmly believe all will come good here - however, it doesn’t hurt to be reminded that ours is not the only view.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

“Mrs May has decided to declare the UK as a land of opportunity and low tax.”
——-
If she’s serious about opportunity perhaps business would be better served if the PM didn’t pursue a strategy of creating barriers to trade where there currently are none. And if tax is the issue, should we really look forward to seeing the U.K. reduce itself to little more than haven status along the lines of Luxembourg, Lichtenstein or, even Jersey?

No. I think there’s something more at play here. And with her Chequers proposals under attack from all sides, like something taken from ‘Realpolitik for dummies’ vol. 2 ch. 3, today’s speech strikes me as little more than a clumsy attempt to get the other side around the table for further Brexit negotiations. After all, with their business taxes levied at about 30%, the last thing either Germany or France need is a connected and integrated tax haven the size of the U.K. right on their doorstep.

Then again I might be entirely mistaken, because - of course - it’s only those dastardly foreigners that do the blackmailing.

Can’t argue with your thoughts about Sirius though, bobster. You’d have thought with an open goal gaping right in front of ‘em, they’d be rather keen to steer one into the back of the net. Pfft... politicians eh?

per ardua ad astra

I’d be cautious if I were you, mail12. You’re currently breaking copyright law and whilst I understand some readers to this board will appreciate your efforts, it is not beyond them - should they be sufficiently interested - to register or subscribe if so.

Regards,

per ardua ad astra

Good afternoon, jack. Good to see you around - I trust all is well. Well... apart from the obvious! I find myself in a similar position to you in that I’ve done well with IQE over the last 18 months, only to find I now have a few positions currently underwater. Clearly there’s much dissatisfaction in the current share price, however, it does go to show there’s a world of difference to the common conception of the company (as manifest in price) and what is actually going on behind the scenes. I remain confident that IQE’s products and technology are/will continue to be needed as the market develops, so continue to believe that as an investment this will come good. However, I would be being somewhat disingenuous if I didn’t admit to a few concerns regarding how the company - with its current leadership team - are able to monetise their position. The fact that it’s been almost six months since Phil Rasmussen’s sad and untimely passing, and yet we’re still waiting for a new FD doesn’t inspire me with confidence, and I will admit to perhaps starting to discern an element of truth in the frequent assertions that the brains in charge - whilst no doubt eminently qualified in their field - could do a lot better at managing some of the multiple facets required in running a successful commercial enterprise.

As I say though, I remain invested and have not unreasonable expectations of a return on my investment here. It is hard to watch the incessant falls though without some sense of frustration.

Best wishes,

per ardua ad astra

It’s a typically cynical and sceptical report from the crummy bloke very much along the lines of the previous. He’s suggesting our Chinese deals are not all they appear and the companies involved are not well established (and perhaps they’re not) but, it quotes a Sirius spokesperson saying “as Sirius is providing a disruptive product its strategy includes partnering with disruptive businesses to gain market share.” Nothing of consequence imo.

per ardua ad astra

How do you know his spelling is casual? It may well be entirely causal for all we know?

per ardua ad astra

Indeed. But how much did he pay for them?

Regards,

per ardua ad astra

Aha, yes. That gap, of course! I thought that perhaps you were alluding to one below that needed closing (as some ever-hopeful claimed last week).

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

Where do you see a gap, Chesh? I see gaps on open on a few days, however, they all seem to have been closed intra-day.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

“it is not clear how much trade with the EU it will have”
——-
It’s not all about the EU though is it, stokey? We’re going to exporting regardless, and whilst we currently enjoy some pretty favourable trade agreements as members of a huge market, likewise we don’t know what future trade agreements will be signed with, China, India, Brazil or whoever. As such everything is up in the air - and to be quite frank, I’m not exactly filled with confidence with Dr Fox’s performance to date.

Dagger — I get that. Which is why I at least endeavour to keep any Brexit related chat to the weekends when readers can read or dismiss at leisure knowing full well they’re not missing anything that might market sensitive whilst it is open.

Regards,

per ardua ad astra

Where do we draw the line on ‘on topic’ though, Cranleigh? I’m well aware of what the T&Cs say, however, unless someone decides something is not of their liking - and reports it - it remains. So it comes down to the tolerances and biases of readers. No doubt many are tired of the whole Brexit farce - who isn’t? - yet nobody can reasonably claim with all certainty that the outcome will not have a bearing on Sirius, any more than they could suggest Labour’s employee shareholder proposals won’t have an impact. Unsurprisingly, that thread remains, however — not because it’s any more worthy or ‘on topic’, rather than simply because some readers aren’t fed up with it.

per ardua ad astra

Bankruptcy?

per ardua ad astra

“I think employee share ownership is a good thing but it is one that the employee should choose to take part in.”
——-
I agree entirely, OR. Within the parameters of a legal framework, it’s not for politicians to tell any company how the should be structured or managed. Besides, although having an interest in a business can be good for productivity many employees given the choice would rather have that value in their pay packets than take on the risk of being shareholders.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra