Adrian Hargrave, CEO of SEEEN, explains how the new funds will accelerate customer growth Watch the video here.
Thanks for your input, I will take it on board as I do with all your posts. Its a response on a bulletin board, I'm just emphasizing what you have told others on here. Do keep in mind that there is a "report button" should you think my posts are of that nature and LSE can take the correct action, however if they think you are inciting will also be subject to a ban and they will go through all your posts too. Lets agree to disagree as it seems you are the only one disagreeing yet again.
Right now I wonder if Mr Daniel Lark is asking that very same question, if he was a genuine investor at £1000 pounds an hour from investment to suspension is the most expensive chop to leave that salon. 48 hours from investment to suspension and 56k blown and rinsed, would really annoy most people. If he was genuine no investor in their right mind would be not be angry about such a loss in such a short space of time, it would be odd not to see some sort of action from anyone that had been through similar fate. Mate or not it would be odd indeed.
Gonch, how could the directors ignore a mail regarding keeping the company going and go to administration. Wouldn't that be illegal based off the RNS dated 17Th December 2014? Company's shares will remain suspended from trading on AIM until further notice as we seek to clarify if there are any other viable funding alternatives. Failing this, the Board will, subject to obtaining independent expert advice, seek to put the Company into administration as previously advised to Shareholders." If this is a possible solution, as its taken shareholders to suggests that shareholders interests are not at the forefront of any thoughts as the Chairman, who is under investigation already issued this statement to shareholders, considering that funds we only have until mid January lack of communication at this time both via RNS and e-mail really is dreadful saying that even before Dec 17Th wasn't that much better either.
Unionpacific, Note the shareholder register, they could knock it back but they are the ones withholding the register. As listed it is a legal right, you could try and see if you can obtain it. Amount of investors and a rough average of holdings would be needed for a base figure so if it lacks financials the company are at fault, 19th December was requested, 5 days to comply. The company are blocking shareholders trying to communicate with all shareholders. You could help by doing some more research on the PIDA including someone to take it on unless your happy to run with this yourself and see how far you get?
When i say this "This is just purely from the tone and looking like this is investors issue as they voted down the resolutions." This is how the tone reads, in layman's terms turkeys should vote for Christmas if asked and enjoy the ride to the shed where you get your neck snapped and consider it a bonus you will fill someone else's belly well. Remember Christmas is a time of giving. This is where there seems to be no real understanding of the giving concept when it comes to dealing with people that have on the whole been really supportive and gave chance after chance. Giving nothing and taking everything is rarely appealing to anyone and shareholders here deserve better treatment than that given what they have endured in terms of a SP slide. Lets see if that RNS is administration or the offer is taken up and people start to work with shareholders in BHR. Its good to see Shareholders working to try to resolve this when in reality this should be the example set at senior levels in companies working with shareholders and not against them.
Afternoon all Beacons, From the dialogue and not 100 percent on this sounds as though the company intend to take BHR to administration. This is just purely from the tone and looking like this is investors issue as they voted down the resolutions. Time limits are near and placings are expensive, but are they? Its been noted that Mr Lark managed to obtain one in a record time, so kind of deflates that argument. Also worthy of note is that BHR could not give any guarantee on if resolutions were passed that we would continue either. What has been proposed is the lifting of the share suspension and a placing the same as Mr Lark was entitled to this is applicable to PI only. This would provide working capital as what you couldn't bank on was a YES vote and then a placing. Shareholders could have said yes been diluted and then no placing due to a funding hitch. Shareholders have been very patient, very loyal and supported BHR but there has to be a time where that is questioned. This is the position we are in, shareholders want what is fair, if Darwin and Mr Lark can have that then makes a valid case for shareholders. As I say it could be interpretation of the tone of the mail that the board will take BHR to administration, but would have to wait for a RNS to be issued to confirm it, the offer has been put to the company and will have to wait for their update. Meanwhile as far as we know investigations are still ongoing and again have to wait for their conclusion. Other things are going on still so have to see what becomes of them. Numbers are being gathered for a meeting so if you can attend mail the mailbox. I may have missed something but its been a busy day and we await news on what the company announcement will be when it arrives if they want to take it to administration or work with shareholders and look at BHR objectively looking at why shareholders blocked the vote and be professional about the situation. Red
www.bhr-investors.com You can add your holdings in "location" in your user profile, in account settings. Please be aware this isn't a fully accurate picture as there are also people who don't hold on the site. The site can also be accessed by people who do not have a genuine interest, just keep that in mind.
If you are lucky enough to get a reply, you will see there is a disclaimer, perhaps RRL don't need this but BHR have included it, if you publish anything are in breach of it. Try sending a mail with a genuine question, then will see what your up against. Plenty of questions you could ask from suspension, actual date company runs out of money, any question on the transaction with the hairdressers, why no voting numbers are released, why shareholder register is not released. You can then see why, assuming you get a response. There are some that would question that, my advise is try and then see first hand.
Jonah, a good post based on what's what. One problem we found with holdings is that not everyone will declare them, remember there are bogus people who will say i hold 30m and in reality dont own one single share. The only way to identify real shareholders and their holding is the shareholders register. Dare say this will uncover some bogus shareholders who dont hold. This was requested 19Th December and BHR have not complied with that legal request and the compliance around it. The company is breaking the law on this, if you look up the rules on what and how as the only way to reach all genuine holders is with this very important document, which you would agree is the only true way and flush out the bluffers. Also if not every shareholder reported irregularities with BHR then are not adding value to ongoing investigations. Same on LSE if suspicious new posters arrive quoting facts, report them if something is not right. These posters intentions is to try to provoke a reaction, just ignore it, keep it civil, no threats etc. We know the BOD read the boards, do not give them any satisfaction, you are much better than that.
I forgot to add, your welcome to put your WOW to shareholders should you have a plan that is interests of shareholders. Plenty of people willing to write a post suggesting its this and that, not many are prepared to step up to the plate. For Muppets there are some pretty smart people on here, that have been here long in excess of December. They also publicised events across all three main forums, TW has flagged this and I'm pretty sure if your heart is in the right place and pitched how you could help shareholders would more than listen. A person with all your experience and expertise is wasted if restricted to words alone. My question to you is can you get beyond the say and into the do phase, I suspect many others have the same doubts. You now know the register is a legal right and not just for shareholders, its law. You could attempt to change the law or find out why that law has been broken, or just keep posting words. Takes all sorts, you get rampers like the one you claim inspired you to buy in an you before a vote where it was common knowledge people would say NO, you get derampers that appear knowing a lot that know very little usually post changes, you saw this with LOND, RRL and continually with QPP. Most actions are words, it was actions that voters took to block the vote, I guess they have more credibility as they did something rather than just talk about it.
All results were published for transparency as are numbers on the shareholder group. The shareholders register is a legal right even I your not a shareholder. Fools rush in, ignorance is bliss and silence is golden are others you can use.
You bought in because someone said on here one you before suspension this share will go far. Which poster said that, it must be a bookmark post for an impulse buy on a vote down. Its no crusade, investigations are ongoing and as much as your posts provide an alternative standpoint Appearing and insulting long term shareholders as a legal professional is hardly the best start, a bit like calling the jury a bunch of losers saying the defendant is laughing at them. Everyone has a say here, but as a solicitor you should choose your words rather than lose credibility like today. Remember you dipped in an hour before vote, some people are nursing 70k+ losses and have been here a long time. Your insulting many shareholders with perhaps less experience of 28 years, but more sense than to invest on what someone said an hour before suspension, they too could laugh at that but didn't. Its about getting value for shareholders, if you want to talk pm me your Mobil and you can talk rather than this.
You can interpret one thing many ways as I'm sure that has been used at corporate levels before in many issues. I admire concern and seem to be concerned, the details of people are searchable this is common public information, you cant stop people researching or we wouldn't have newspapers. LSE also monitor boards, just as FCA regulate etc, my actions are solid I too have been transparent with BHR and still not sure where the chairman's sexuality comes into this issue? What the chairman does in his own time really has no bearing, whatever that is that's being referenced. The actions of the chairman are an issue in relation to BHR, this is a bulletin board you want censorship on, this isn't North Korea where people chat, same as all the other AIM listed share boards. Would you like to control and censor those too? Just as the FCA are here to police AIM, LSE has a duty to police here if threats are being used. Were all concerned, however the company is not really helping matters in relation to many aspects, however you do seem supportive to their cause, drop them a mail and see if you can explain how they can help alleviate shareholders concerns and relay sexuality is no issue, code of conduct may well be a different matter. Look forward to hearing how you get on and would welcome a response on issues raised rather than silence. After all I am a shareholder with a decent sized holding.
BOD do read these boards, in RRL 's Campaign had some posts which led to people being removed. Some identities on here are under scrutiny already. Duxi can spell better than most at his age and top marks for being able to use a PC, commendable stuff. How would a Chairman be able to compare porn stars and the RAF, think some veterans may take that as extremely offensive, check the code of conduct document. Everyone has a view, and certainly shareholders deserve answers with all the things gone on, even if its to say that the allegations are untrue. I love a good debate but no one has posted one plausible theory on that transaction where you could go...never thought of it like that. What is amazing is that since the no vote the influx of people with so much knowledge have appeared here, that know all about a company in detail they have no investment in, you too could admit its a little odd. Who is questioning the sexuality of the chairman, that's twice today its been mentioned? Perhaps we dont have 28 years of legs experience, but are standing up.
If you can operate a computer at Duxi's age would be surprised, coupled with your customer skills and ability to see both sides of a legal standpoint, no wonder you ended up in AIM in BHR. You have the skills to be running a company in AIM, not just talking a poor game. Lasted less than 10 posts on here and running off, don't see anything suspicious in what's gone on some defence strategy you have, if you cant see anything wrong and not prepared to step up either.
Right now BHR are laughing at us all, good to know. They were laughing too when they thought the vote was done, what a difference a day makes. 28 years practicing you may get a bit of work from the adult industry, if you put it to the chairman, just exactly what he meant with porn stars and coming up short and how that relates to the RAF. Your case could be worth millions, people here are polite, coming hear calling people Muppets that do care as a solicitor perhaps isn't the best approach for a professional, you wouldn't get many clients with insults like that. No discrimination here, shareholders site is available if you want to PM.
28 years and you choose a word like Muppets, is not whiter than white either. So you can see whiter than white is a myth and wish you well too.
If you feel something has been misreported based on what's been done and said, as you seem to know a lot about I to be able to hint something has, then just point it out. You assume that is just on LSE that people have this view, surveys were taken from LSE, III, ADVFN. Initial investigations means having to complain too, as you have not means either you believe all Is good, and based on factual RNS, its all well and good posting but more impact would be gained by reporting anything odd to go with the others if you believe something should be looked into, most of which is in RNS. Opinions differ from person to person and as I say BHR have this data to work with, ask for a copy of the shareholders register or numbers from the vote if you haven't complained will do after your request.
Thanks for the input, these surveys were canvassed across three boards so not just share action group. I would take a trip to the BHR action group site and have a look around Also if you are concerned report market abuse too, you don't have to be a shareholder to do this Its all on the shareholder site and free, as you hold shares but don't want to commit to anything is odd, unless you believe that there are no issues in BHR? These are surveys completed. By shareholders so simply reporting what those figures are, BHR have this data. results were published in each and every one of them.
PM UCL student if you could on the shareholders action group site. Less publicised on BB the better at least just for a numbers game, keep the guess work on the numbers off the radar.