George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
Posted advfn pwhite73
maidit308 on LSE chat - "if they push us out of business, as everyone would end up with FK all'' and defeat the object," Clearly someone who doesn't understand what's going on. The reason why DS purchased the Shard debt of £184k was not to collect the money but to push ICON into administration then get it dissolved so Greencastle did not have to pay back the £1 million they borrowed and monies owed to ICON when the directors resigned without giving a notice period and taking ICON's business with them. DS, Greencastle, JQ, LH, SA and Joe Media all want ICON dissolved dead and buried for financial reasons.
Italy to require all workers to show 'green pass' certificate.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-58590187.amp
Lots of countries now going the route of covid passes. Ctea well positioned?
That was a fast response blamethrower for someone not invested here you guard over watch this forum very closely? Strange wouldn’t you say.
People in Wales will need to show a pass proving they have been fully vaccinated or had a negative Covid test to attend clubs and large-scale events.
The new rules begin on 11 October.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-58596128
Great entry price,, I’m sure lots going on in background and guy and the team working hard to take ctea onwards and upwards.
Didnt the ex board members of icon a year ago loan greencastle £1 million, (with greencastle being who they all now work for)?
Isnt that loan of £1 million not due to icon today?
Anyone know what time greencastle will be paying back the loan?
Will they be paying by bank transfer? Bacs?
Great that icon are due this money at this much needed time.
And great the ex board will be paying this loan back swiftly being the honourable gentleman that they are?
Good luck all icon shareholders
Records of the administration have now been logged at Companies House. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/10197256/filing-history Contrary to what we all thought it was not Shard Merchant Capital that appointed the administrators although they are the only secured creditor it was a company called Arch Capital Partners LLP. You'll get no Blue Peter badges for guessing who's behind it. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/OC354787/officers The statement made by EHGOS that the administrators were appointed with an improper motive is now beginning to make sense. Somebody clearly wants this company dead before 08 July 2021. RNS Iconic Labs 08/07/2020 - "As part of negotiating the management services agreement, the Company has entered into a £1 million loan agreement with Greencastle Capital. The loan is repayable within one year"
EHGO to Apply for Iconic Labs Administrators to Be Removed, General Meeting to Proceed
June 09, 2021 04:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time
LUXEMBOURG--(BUSINESS WIRE)--European High Growth Opportunities Securitization Fund (“EHGO”), an institutional investment fund based in Luxembourg, has announced that it will be making an application for the Iconic Labs (“Iconic”) administrators to be removed and for Iconic’s General Meeting (“GM”) to proceed.
In the statement, EHGO said: “As previously announced, we wrote to the administrators informing them that we would pay the debt of £184,295.04 demanded by the secured creditor which appointed them, and requesting that they vacate office. We also communicated our view that their cancellation of Iconic‘s GM was a breach of their duties, given that holding the GM is necessary for the company to have a viable financial future.
“As we have received no substantive response, and given the wider circumstances, we will be making an application to the High Court on the grounds that the administrators were appointed with an improper motive and seeking to remove them from office. Interim relief will be sought to enable the GM to proceed, either on 15 June 2021 as originally planned, or on a later date.
“We believe that it is now likely that the GM will go ahead, whether on 15 June or a later date. We believe it is critical that shareholders vote on the resolutions set out in the original notice for the GM which are necessary for Iconic to have a viable financial future.
“We would therefore urge shareholders to appoint a proxy by completing the Form of Proxy sent to them with the shareholder circular, naming the chair of the meeting as their proxy. This needs to be received by 2pm on Friday 11 June. It can be sent to the company’s registrars, SLC Registrars, at proxy@slcregistrars.com.
“As previously noted, we were in discussions with Iconic to provide substantial new financing arrangements involving a facility of up to £50 million and have tremendous faith in the vision for the company set out by CEO Brad Taylor to be a cutting-edge media, data, information, internet, security and technology company. We hope that shareholders in the company will join us in supporting this vision and passing the necessary resolutions at the GM.
“Should shareholders wish to attempt to obtain information from the administrators, for ease of reference their contact details are:
Mr Hugh Jesseman & Mr Antony Batty
Antony Batty & Company LLP
3 Field Court, Gray's Inn, London WC1R 5EF
Email: hugh@antonybatty.com & antonyb@antonybatty.com
Tel: +44 (0)207 831 1234"
Ends
Notes to editors
Posted on advfn
Greencastle Capital Ltd trying to get struck off and dissolved before the £1 million is due for payment July 2021.
What did EHGOS say "improper motive".
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/12434223
I don’t think anyone has?
A secured creditor that demands money owed to then not respond when the money is offered!?!
the motive behind this has to be questioned?
Was it to stop the general meeting going ahead to unlock funding? Thus potentially liquidating the company.
Or ironically was it the fact that next month icon is due itself repayment of money owed! As the previous team/board members of icon loaned greencastle £1 million! (Which they now work for!) which is due for repayment to icon July 21!.
Very Strange!
So the secured creditor who has gone to the trouble of bringing administration agay icon to retrieve monies owed, then ignore/refuse to reply to an offer made to fully repay monies owed to them?
Something truly stinks about this called in administration and it’s timing.
The key passage from the EHGOS update - “As we have received no substantive response, and given the wider circumstances, we will be making an application to the High Court on the grounds that the administrators were appointed with an improper motive and seeking to remove them from office."
A View on advfn-
The administrators were not appointed to rescue ICON but appointed to prevent ICON from pursuing the £1 million loaned to Greencastle. Disgraceful.
hope things works out for icons beleaguered shareholders.
Thought this stood out
‘From a business perspective, it makes no sense for a creditor to push a company on the cusp of unlocking up to £50 million in new funding in a week into administration’?
Do Serious questions need to be asked about the timing and why and who was involved in bringing about this involuntary administration?
Agree since this article egho and OTT have made statements
If egho have proposed to pay creditor with money arranged, why are the administrators not acknowledging this and stepping down? So the board, buisness can continue with the general meeting which would be in the best interest for the company it’s shareholders and it’s creditors.
https://www.asktraders.com/analysis/iconic-labs-shares-suspended-from-trading-as-joint-administrators-take-over-the-firm/
Shares of Iconic Labs PLC (LON: ICON) were temporarily suspended from trading on the London Stock Exchange after the appointment of joint administrators over the company following an unsatisfied demand for payment from a secured creditor.
Today’s announcement is yet another major setback for the company, which has had many ups and downs this year, starting with the resignation of its previous management team after a fallout with majority shareholder OTT Ventures.
I recently covered Iconic Labs after its CEO outlined its new strategy split into three business divisions. Its current media and publishing business and its latest ventures to acquire security, data and information, technology, and AI businesses.
Iconic Labs had the full backing of the European High Growth Securitization Fund (EHGOF), which had committed to funding the company to the tune of £50 million once shareholders approved the company’s new business plan during an AGM on June 15, 2021.
However, the AGM will no longer be happening after Antony Batty and Hugh Jesseman were appointed as joint administrators of the company on Friday evening and took over today.
From a business perspective, it makes no sense for a creditor to push a company on the cusp of unlocking up to £50 million in new funding in a week into administration.
Most institutional creditors would choose to wait for such a company to unlock the new funding before taking forceful measures to recover a loan.
Since we are not aware of precisely what happened with the secured creditor, we can only hope that Iconic Labs will emerge from administration by settling the outstanding debts with the secured creditor.
It is times like this that investors must remember the old saying that nothing is guaranteed in the markets. There is a significant chance that the company could have settled the payment demand if made after unlocking the funding from EHGOF.
From advfn
In brief for you guys directors do have the right to challenge the appointment of administrators if the administration itself is not enforceable. For example if the company and the creditor(s) were in discussions and the creditor agreed not to appoint administrators until the discussions concluded. The court ruled that challenging the appointment of administrators is not the same as interfering with the work of the administrators. As ICON's administration was completely out of the blue I'm inclined to think that's what happened here. ICON new of the floating charge but did not expect Shard to appointment administrators so close to ICON holding a GM to raise £5 million. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0f367c12-b557-4e19-a502-65a964a9dd46 "Directors can cause a company to challenge the appointment of administrators under a charge - but who pays?" This is beginning to stink of rotten fish. Interesting that one of the administrators William Anthony Batty is the same person used to wind up Widecells Ltd. Somebody clearly does not want ICON to survive. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08202804/insolvency.
Correct me if I’ve got this wrong.
Aren’t icon owed 1 million that the previous board loaned to greencastle, which they then jumped ship to?
After the last board created such company and share destruction, why do they/greencastle not do the honourable and good thing and repay the loan back to icon?
Or is it in for the previous boards benefit to see the demise of icon and thus paying anything back? And avoid being held to account for what they did??