Member Info for Punter21

The RNS contains a number of interesting points.

1. No advisers names at the bottom of the announcement, which is unusual. Did none of them want to put their names to it?

2. The Board comprises 7 post de-list. Are they finally ridding themselves of the estate agent Gabriel?

3. This all appears very rushed.

I am pretty sanguine on the move. It is clear that the London market is broken. Taking private / VCT money makes perfect sense as long as directors' feet are held to the fire for an eventual exit at the right price.

Where are you on this?

That’s the CFO, not the CEO TF. I actually think that that is baloney. The change in broker for each raise is testimony to the fact that he has no credibility with either the broker fraternity nor an institutional following.

It’s time he was replaced with someone who knew what he/she was doing and had the interest and support of meaningful sizeable institutions or brokers with global reach.

Sooner rather than later. Without which the share price, regardless of the sterling efforts of the new board members, will be going nowhere.

Spot on Lionsworld. I think a large amount of the insecurity surrounding the finances of the company can be laid at the feet of the CFO as I have mentioned previously. Let us hope the board are listening to the company shareholders as they should be and act upon it.

Lionsworld, I share your view on the CFO, as I have previously posted. There is however one other who really shouldn't be on the board, and that is Trevor Gabriel, an NED, and laughably the head of the audit committee. He is a Monaco-based estate agent!

No I am not. It was rather quiet so I decided not to bother.

Morning SL. No I didn’t forget.

I am not so much concerned about EVage, although from their turnover numbers and market position they would appear to need DGI more than DGI needs them.

I am more concerned with the lack of financial control in the business. The FD is not a qualified accountant. He is an ex oil and gas analyst from the City and does not appear to have many if any institutional supporters. Otherwise the stock would be a lot more tightly held.

Maybe we need a heavyweight qualified FD with a City following to compliment the management team to get a grip on finances?

SL. I don’t have a problem. And yes I am aligned with the facts. Regrettably your figure of 7million, no matter how boring it is, is way off as you well know. In fact a thousand times way off. But as a holder of course that suits your book.

Let’s not let the facts get in the way of a good story.

I most certainly am not a day trader! I have been a shareholder in this company I dare say a lot longer than you or indeed SL and my holding is larger than his and probably most on this board. I have not sold a share. Indeed I have ben a consistent buyer and declared myself as such.

My only motivation is the truth so that no one is misled, for whatever personal reasons that they may have. It is clear to me that the CLN holders are a constant tap for stock to give them a free ride in the company.

I am very clear on the capital structure of this business . Until the CLN holders are either locked in or give an irrevocable pledge to hold their converted stock for a period of time, at least 12 months, this will continue to be a brake on any performance, hoped for or otherwise, in the shares. They will continue to sell into any strength in the price.

SL whilst we all make mistakes, yours was very misleading.

And I do take exception to your assertion that you are in the hands of the directors. You will be well aware that as a creditor you rank above ordinary shareholders in the event of a liquidation. Which is of course a position we would all like to see ourselves in.

So to be clear, if all of the CLN holders decided to hedge their holdings, there would be pretty much 50% of the current issued share capital washing about.

Just to be clear, page 74 company accounts December 2023 reads " Assuming all notes are converted at the 0.035p conversion price, the number of Ordinary shares will be increased by 6,945,714,286.

Not, 7 million, not 700 million but 6.9 billion.

I’m going to give up posting. It is clear no one is listening.

Apologies. Typing too quickly. That should have read “I know that they were contacted regarding Boughtwood….”

I k PE that they were contacted regarding Boughtwood but nothing seems to have happened there.

Not so SL and I dare say you know that if you have enquired. Grants are however a possibility.

See my earlier post, or work it out for yourself.

As I said nonsense TF. It is 20 % maximum in any 12 month period. It is a Main Market stock, and hence subject to Prospectus Rules. EGM is irrelevant. If they want to issue more shares, they need a prospectus. It is very common for a company to have a very high headroom granted by shareholders at the AGM, and certainly higher than the 20% prospectus rules cap. But that does not negate the Prospectus Rules requirement for Main Market.

Utter nonsense TF. This is not AIM. I suggest that you either read up on it or take it from someone who has done this many many times.

I doubt the company has the headroom to issue further shares without the cost of a prospectus at this stage, as the prospectus regulations only allow for 20% of the issued share cap in any 12 month period. Prospectus costs are both high and time consuming. I repeat that it is much more likely that they fund themselves going forward by a partial sale / investment into the anode and/or an upfront payment from a motor customer.