Member Info for ProcessGuy

Stonk:

I think the answer to your 11.21 post is that the lab work is complete, i.e. frozen. So leaving it to the end of the three months doesnt gain Eli anymore data or certainty, just time to fine tune the deal. Thats how I read the RNS anyway.

GT4Racer:
Re you post yesterday evening, did you manage to make contact with the co?
Not so much interested in any details but more in their attitude - positive/defensive etc?

Traders12:

You are assuming that the machine in the video is running at full speed, its a demonstration video only so is likely to be run in turndown mode. I read your numbers as a feasible MINIMUM production rate for the machine.

Moz2020:

Agreed, probably is fair to use it as a minimum throughput number though.

Moz2020: Here you go;

This article dated 21/1/21 has a video , bottom of the article, of a Lemu mask machine unit, presumably at the factory:

https://www.labelandnarrowweb.com/contents/view_breaking-news/2021-01-21/lemu-group-engineers-mask-making-machine/

You can see that the complexity is in synchronising all of the various manufacturing steps.

That last post should have been to TheSyrup not JonnyM (apologies )

JonnyM: I think Torreagus is referring to my post from yesterday ?

This article dated 21/1/21 has a video , bottom of the article, of a Lemu mask machine unit, presumably at the factory:

https://www.labelandnarrowweb.com/contents/view_breaking-news/2021-01-21/lemu-group-engineers-mask-making-machine/

You can see that the complexity is in synchronising all of the various manufacturing steps.

Mark/Pandou/Big:

I expect that we will see an update of some description in two weeks time. The Significnt Shareholder section on the website requires updating at least every 6 months (AIM Rule 26), this was last done on the 2nd of September. These large trades (2x7M) will have to be accounted for and a TR1 issued plus an update to the Significant Shareholder listing; assuming of course it wasnt a roll-over or a new holder who is still below the threshold. It should tell us who is buying and who is selling.

Bigma9i:
If its not a roll-over then 14M shares is around 2.6% of the shares in issue. If its metallon or one of the existing significant shareholders then you would expect (require) a TR1. Another question might be who is selling ? The shares came from somebody and I don't think its from PI's.

Giromannn:
Thanks for confirming the missing 1M trade and summarising the numbers. I was begining to think no one could be bothered replying. Onwards and upwards next week.

Just gone through on the mid-price (2.00). Doesnt look like a roll-over.

error !
Trade from today was 1,200,000......... I had it down as 1,000,000. So the missing number is 200,000 lower.

Does anyone know/remember whether there was a big delayed trade reported on 4th from the 3rd ? LSE isnt allowing me to go far enough back to check.

Tallying up the big delyed trades from the 4th to 10th I have a total of 5,341, 935.
The Mint allotment is 7,741,935.
Uncannily similar number pattern ? All nice round number trades except one for 941,935. Is there another 2,400,000 to come and then they're out or was there a trade from the 3rd so its less than this ?

Cazbraz:

Try JJ.Carter

Just watched the video - that's not good. No operator PPE, no safety guarding on the spiral classifier and no safety guarding or barriers around the ball mill. Very poor.

Honestopinion (18:55):

No not at all, no recomedations......

"4. Guidance for Shareholders

The Board is not issuing a recommendation to Shareholders. Instead, the Board asks Shareholders to consider the following issues in deciding how to vote on the Resolutions 1 and 2 in respect of the Warrants:" RNS 27th Jan.

Torreaguas:
You are indeed correct.
"The following notes give an explanation of the proposed Resolutions. Resolutions 1 and 3 are proposed as ordinary resolutions. This means for these resolutions to be passed, more than half of the votes cast must be in favour of each resolution. Resolutions 2 and 4 are proposed as special resolutions. This means that for these resolutions to be passed, at least three quarters of the votes cast must be in favour each resolution." (RNS 27th Jan).

JP:
Its the number of votes cast not the number in issue.
"The following notes give an explanation of the proposed Resolutions. Resolutions 1 and 3 are proposed as ordinary resolutions. This means for these resolutions to be passed, more than half of the votes cast must be in favour of each resolution. Resolutions 2 and 4 are proposed as special resolutions. This means that for these resolutions to be passed, at least three quarters of the votes cast must be in favour each resolution." (RNS 27th Jan).

So your numbers are more favourable.

Definately pushed in my view. Two lines is about as perfunctory as its possible to get. Wheels starting to turn a little faster maybe ?

Mark99999:

You may well be proven right in the fullness of time but its only been three weeks since the new BoD took over effective control of the company. The EGM was a bitter power play and damage has been done. I think we need to give them time to set their stall out and if I were in their shoes I would want to take my time reviewing everything very carefully before doing, or announcing, anything.
The EGM voting was also very informative, the numbers clearly showed the level of support that Metallon has from the other significant share holders. Metallon could launch a low ball bid but to be succesful they will still need the support of, and ultimately shares from, these holders and why would they accept a low ball bid? They dont have to and I bet most have an average well north of the current share price.