Member Info for Punter21

Not wishing to teach sucking eggs etc this is the whole purpose of corporate governance. To protect shareholders against just this sort of activity

All the same, we need to root out the cancer and that means Boughtwood must go. Then we move on. No fudge. No wriggles. No apologies. Just go.

He is the issue. He is responsible as a director for his and his family’s dealings in shares of the company. That is the law. Whether he knew or not ( he did) is immaterial. He has broken the law and must suffer the consequences.

She is not an employee. He is. I don’t know where this idea of buy back came from but it is nonsense. He will have to resign his directorship and probably his employee status as well. He has broken the law and he will have to account for himself to the FCA and the authorities.

Not true. Basil.

They all came from a family trust owned by MB whose beneficiaries are his wife and adult children.

Read the prospectus and the annual report and accounts which were released quite recently. It’s all there.

Once the new board take decisive action, get rid of Boughtwood (and possibly others) this will fly. But not until.

“In my judgment, the factual assessment and conclusion that the judge ultimately made and ar- rived at are unassailable. Mr Boughtwood started the trial at a major disadvantage as a result of his disgraceful, and inexcusable, conduct of 24 June 2008 whereby he sought, and for a month achieved (and, had he had his way, it would have been for longer), practical control of the group so that he could run it his way and renege on what he had agreed with his quasi-partner. His conduct was un- derhanded and unconstitutional, it was damaging to the group and its business and it marked the fi- nal destruction of any element of continuing trust and confidence that might still have existed be- tween the quasi-partners. His attempts to explain and justify his conduct added up to nought. The judge rejected his 'conspiracy' defence and he abandoned it before us. He claims to have acted on advice, but has not disclosed it. He claims to have been entitled to act as he did with a view to escap- ing the imposition on him of the SCDC offer, but I am not persuaded that in objecting to that offer he was doing other than reneging on what he had earlier agreed so as to promote his own personal interests above those of the group. The point had been reached when the group could not afford not to accept the SCDC offer and his deliberate frustration of it was probably the most direct cause of

PML's subsequent collapse into administration.”

Yes there is. You only have to dig djwall1s. Lots more.

No stranger to the court room.

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff70e60d03e7f57ea6db0

Apologies. 39 trades.

This wasn’t carelessness. 37 deals? Come on. This was premeditated insider trading. Let them dangle.

One thing MB is not is naive. He is no stranger to the uk judicial process.

Not a prayer my friend. He knew.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Martin Boughtwood is the root cause of this issue and should be dealt with by the authorities in the harshest possible manner. I am surprised not to see an announcement this morning with his “resignation from the board” but perhaps there are more issues to come to light, which would not be a surprise.

His actions have destroyed both value and investor confidence in this company. The board must act decisively and surgically to remove this cancer and turn him and his wife over to the FCA and the law and for the company to move on to restore it’s battered reputation.

Most likely fired from board and as a director. Re-hired as a consultant is the usual way of the world. It is up to the authorities to deal with the criminality of insider trading.

there are bound to be a lot of very ****ed off people today. there is no doubt that there has been a breach of the law here and boughtwood has to fall on his sword, resign his board position and accept a consultancy position with the business. this calls into question the corporate governance regime within the company and its advisers and let's hope that this will be addressed comprehensively and be an end to it.

The technology has been around for a while - since the 1950s. The issue is the lack of practical wattage in miniaturisation - but they are working on it. In any event, this is not designed for sodium ion markets so you aren't comparing apples with apples etc....

I will answer you Novice T. They go to AIM for two principal reasons.

1. They can access funds more easily without having to publish a prospectus (which is expensive and time consuming) time and again. I shall spare you the technicalities.

2. They can access tax advantage investment money, such as AIM and VCT funds, who are allowed to invest in AIM, but not the main market. Again, I shall spare you the technical details.

If that is so it is news to the market. I think you need to go back and read the RNS announcements.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/DGI/director-share-dealings-wcinv3nuo5w1zzb.html

Volume ticking up and on the buy side - buys being reflected as sells.