Member Info for rhd1

I had given up posting on this one as it appears to me that peoples wish to win, and destroy the board at any cost was becoming the main goal.
But, the following comment brought me back...
'Given that it is apparent from this BB that the predominant voting trend being intimated from the vast majority of the poster’s on here to be against the resolutions....',
I accept that it is talking about posters but this is a useless comparison, the same dozen or so posters who are shouting this do not in any form indicate the number likely to vote against the resolution! To me it indicates that the vast majority of BB viewers simply do not want to engage in this type of unpleasant conversation .
I am unaware of the actual numbers of investors holding the Val shares but I am prepared for the resolution to succeed and although not ideal at least we will survive for the next step. I had already voted for the resolution and hope others have also. I also suspect that the BOD are a bit more organised than this board and will be prepared for the meeting to ensure it goes through. We will see so soon enough.

Rightback,
You invest 68k and would rather lose the lot than consolidate! Your own personal business model is certainly interesting, although not one that I am aware of, but perhaps that explains your thinking about losing a 68k investment, or were you really joking?
Sorry, not seen the footy advert either but an interesting question you posed to SL, but right back at you, if you and Fred muck it up and val go bust due to lack of capital will you be offering to compensate or will you say it's nothing to do with the groups activity and all the fault of the BOD even though they are trying to raise said capital?
Like Fred, you and many others, I have been here a few years and all of us could have sold at any time if we thought the risk was too great. Fred states that he invested based on what he was told which is alarming to me, as most investors do their own research . I was happy to invest, as I did then and still do believe in the science. However, I have known all along that if it failed it would be my fault for investing in a potentially high gain but high risk AIM share.
Anyway, each of us is entitled to have our moans about own investments but roll on the vote so we can hopefully get it sorted and on with development of the products and the business .

Fredd1eboy, not sure about the Lord and Master angle but I just reminded myself which scientists put the company together, identified, procured, developed and appear to be trying to move forward the products under the val banner? Rather than remove those Scientists which I believe will destroy the company, I agree that quality business expertise is needed to compliment their scientific expertise. This all costs money of course and until a partner comes forward, which they won't until a product is established then the inevitable placing to pay for the status quo BOD (and any additional NED expertise) is always going to happen. Perhaps it would have been better for the discussions to be more about the BOD bonus payments, share allocation in lieu of salary and so on. IMO we need a more measured approach to try to strengthen the board, not lose much of the original expertise and knowledge of the products in development. All in IMO of course and I accept that there some pretty polarized views and therefore looks like it will be down to the vote to see if we survive or not.

AIMO

Are you sure, as that's not what the RNS said!

let's hope they don't go into insolvency as even after any dilution we are still in the game at least!
Lot's of anger on here , hope it is not clouding sound business judgement just when a cool head is most needed.