The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Bankfool, I think you are right with more money being spent and not necessarily on the right things.
For me, the PR company appears to be taken on to deal with negative views and save Ms Dilly's job rather than deal with any new good and new news coming in.
I am also concerned about Dr Hargreaves appointment , he is without doubt very knowledgeable and good to have invested but personally I preferred his challenges to be coming from outside the tent, and seen and shared with the wider investors and those that were thinking of coming on board. I'm sure his influence will help but not sure his voice will be so strong or public.
Like many here, I first invested under the old management and despite what the daily rampers tell us, it is looking more and more likely that this is going to be a repeat performance of those bad times, unless something breaks soon with the products, evaluations , partnerships we have out there.
'How many mistakes do BOD need to make before we make a change? Suzy will be great in the lab.
Iceman,
Do you realise the irony of your comment, as that is where she came from with the last coup, no due diligence, advertising or interview just a few shareholders voicing that 'she is such a nice person! Well, she probably is, but can she deliver? not looking like it at the moment.
'Have spoken to the new CEO who comes across well, articulate and driven. She also fully understands the issues of the past....
Did I miss her appointment, thought she was recently lifted to Director or has she been promoted to CEO now??
Not sure they have struck a deal as you say, appears to me that they are continuing... with an evaluation of the product after studying the data.
We all know what we would like it to be but not sure that we are there yet.
British Bulldog.
What a nasty piece of work you are , I bet your a little terrier really? Don't try to state more silliness with Ip address nonsense as if you would even know something like that. You really need to get a grip, and do you normally use language like that in your normal life. Let it go man and sell now before it gets to your health!
Thanks for the responses, some with good points but others from the usual suspects with the usual rubbish.
Couple of answers , I have been invested since 2012, I first posted on this particular board in May of 2015. I have never sold a Val share (yet). I have a substantial holding here. I am nothing to do with anybody on the board or their families. I have also seen a loss over the years but personally put most of that down to the costs of acquiring, developing and testing the various products due to come to the market. Personally, I believe in the science and if I did not I would have sold a few years ago unlike some who held but clearly do not believe in the product and did not get out perhaps when they should have done.
Unfortunately, all that has done has clouded their judgement because they left it too late. Anyway I say again to anyone wavering, vote yes to the resolution and lets see how it progresses.
Wow, how can anybody say that GM is not supported by the Company when the RNS actually states that the other directors do not support the group of 9 who sent the letter calling for them to be removed? Is that not a clear endorsement and support for both directors by the Valirx board? Just in case I have missed it, Is there any other evidence saying how bad they are or is it just the personal opinion of the more angry people here.
Regarding the missed deal in Paris etc, was this not the one that was rubbished by this very b board a few years ago as it was not considered anywhere near good enough at the time?
And the clamour for Ms Dilley who appears to be a replacement put forward by the 9 people group, always assuming that the resolution succeeds and GM is removed. What board level experience does she have, she has apparently told one of the 9 letter group why she thinks she would be able to do the job but is she what Val wants or needs, or if it came to it, would we want to follow the normal process, advertise and select the best person for the job.
Roll on the votes so that we can either go forward or fold, and just so you know I will be voting a resounding yes to all three resolutions in the first vote and categorically no on the second vote if it goes to it. Finally, to the positive posters, well done
for putting your views across despite the bully boy tactics, bad language and insults from a small minority on here. I am sure that I will now attract some of it but there we are, not bothered and a good example of social media at its best!
Equally Stumbler there will be an opposing view that if the two directors look as if they are going , the big players might not want to take it on without them and their knowledge. We are full circle again, in that many shareholders and even some of the 9 in the letter group recognise that something is better than nothing and will now vote yes.
Hi SL,
i just wanted to note that the action group are a voice, but only one group of individuals in contact along with many others either individually or collectively. Putting the replies to personal emails aside, the RNS is the only way that the board can legitimately communicate with all shareholders without getting into the legal minefield. This particular action group have been left with just the same individual member votes as everybody else for the first vote which is right and proper, it's not a refusal to communicate from the board but simply the way it works.
Whether we will ever see the director vote will rely on the first vote, if it goes down, then admin as already been said, with any funds paying the administrators, if passes then a number of options open to the board and the shareholders at that point and which will be interesting particularly if market confidence is raised in some way.
I am still buying, not because I want to raise my voting rights but because I think news may well be on the way when we get past this hurdle, but each to their own and doubt I will get much agreement here but no matter. It would be boring if we all agreed.
Personally I would have thought that the only proper communication would have been from the group outlining their concerns as they did and a formal response as we now have. Is that not as per company law as they are on a very difficult road to ensure that their legal liability to all shareholders in or outside of the group are carefully managed. Just imagine if a side deal was done with any group outside of the due process. The RNS resolutions/ vote is the only way to resolve it.
Pad,
Good questions but the action group are so focussed on destroying the two directors they will not see that your questions should have been asked before they took the action they did. I think they know that the narrow and ill thought out resolution has finished Valirx and no fresh finance or development will emerge now. I will give them the benefit of doubt and perhaps they thought it would force the board to look at alternatives but was never going to happen while they e painted them into such a tight corner. The Board are not without fault and they did not estimate the true cost of the trials correctly. Had they done so and raised more finance previously instead of the dribs and drabs that enabled confidence to erode things might have been different. This week should see one way or the other I imagine but a sad time for cancer research.
Fred,
Perhaps it is the way I read your post, but but it does appear to me you think they only have to consider your groups views. They have a legal duty to consider and respond to all proposals put forward, this does of course include your groups suggestions and opinions as well as the many others who have been in contact with theBoD. The legal parameters are in place for just this sort of situation where there are many different views as to possible progress. Crucially for the the BoD it
also includes the liability for any action taken which might explain the delay getting those actions right. The next RNs will be interesting and some may be disappointed while others will be pleased as I think it is clear from comments here and elsewhere that there is a split view regarding support for whether they go bust or try again to raise capital. Anyway, for me given some of the information/indicators slowly appearing I do believe that we may soon see some positive news .
Good post SL,
Freddie, just because somebody quotes the same report as GM does not make them that person, you really, really do not know how obviously wrong you are! Regarding Valju point about me knowing the process he followed so I must be one of the board , it was quite simple to see when he/you stated what he had done and what he expected the board to do in response. No inside knowledge from me just a bit of normal research about the process to be followed.
Never going to convince you or join your cause so I will simply wait and see how this unfolds.
This is taken from the Report: AIM Directors’ Remuneration Report 2020 dated 17 February 2020. which might interest some.
https://www.bdo.co.uk/en-gb/insights/industries/aim/aim-directors-remuneration-report
CEO median total remuneration for AIM listed companies is £324,000 which is 30% higher than the equivalent figure for 2014. For FDs/CFOs, the median salary for the latest year is £208,000.
This figure marks an 18% increase from five years ago when the median salary was £175,500.
The percentage of individuals receiving a bonus has been quite steady over the past two years. For both CEOs and FDs/CFOs, just over 70% of executives have bonus elements included in their remuneration.
Despite what some conveniently say, I am not in any way associated with the Board or anybody working for Val, just a long term holder with a substantial share holding.
valju,
i suspect that the silence you refer to is simply that they do not have to answer you unless legally required to. You may think that arrogant but they clearly don't, you are the ones with the proposal and have to ensure that it complies with all of the correct procedures,not them until you have done your bit.