Member Info for RichTheNewbie

Germany lose to S Korea 2-0......and crash out of the world cup :))))

scott - are you talking about recently or a long time ago? Because CH has basically said there's feck all chance of getting funding from development from banks now. Otherwise they should be doing that now and there would be no point in this "strategic review". So I think it's fairly clear that's not really an option right now personally.

The problem is they're already doing that New_2_LSE2018.
They can't produce any more without money for development.
They don't have this money.
Hence the strategic review (ie - try to find someone to give them the money in return for something - or sell up completely).

bradis the board can dilute you. Don't know where you got the idea they can't. The dilution was authorised in resolution 5. 6 being voted down just means they'll have to offer it to you on the same terms or get you to authorise it via an EGM.

Having said that it's obviously not shorting that's the problem here - as you say :p

mbennett83 - "Reso, PIs don't choose whether their shares get lent out for shorts, that is up to the broker. However, PIs can place sell orders to stop their broker doing this."

As far as I know this is an AIM myth and doesn't stop them doing it. I think the only way(s) you can do it is to get certificated copies of your share, or them moved into a special segregated account, but I can't remember the specific name for the latter thing.

Jeepers creepers........this would now have to rise aproximately 2900% to get back to where it was when I sold two years ago!
Sounds so ridiculous that you'd think I was exaggerating.
Sadly I'm not!

It's just a typo not an agatha christie novel....jeez!

It's probably people speculating it won't get much lower and buying the lows.
Of course that usually only goes on for so long before some sort of news is needed to spur any more buying.
Even if I'm more skeptical of the chances than many on here. It's sometimes tempting to take a punt at the lows simply for the small bounce that often happens (even if it did end up going lower later on).
Have resisted the urge though thusfar :p

It's just a mistake that they then corrected (put a one instead of a zero at the front).

Someone with fat fingers put a trade through at 1.72p instead of 0.72p :)

Surely there's no doubt it's been a damp squib!?

And there's the tick down.
0.75p-0.85p now.

I assume you mean the trades not the order book......
The order book looks awful with only one MM at 0.8p, one at 0.7p, three down at 0.65p and one at 0.5p

The articles of association, that I was referring to last week, are on the Ascent website.........
(don't know why you want to pay for them....they're free!)

Ah. I thought so. Wasn't entirely sure from the final sentence.
Well as I currently view it something like 60/40 against it being worth the risk here I suppose I agree.
Wouldn't be surprised if it did OK but would be slightly less surprised if it didnt :)

The market or you reso?

Or turn up in person and get one vote per person.

So as far as I can see, only if a poll was called, would the one vote per share apply. So basically you might as well not bother voting unless someone calls a poll.

Not sure that's true. The articles of association say it's decided by a show of hands, with 1 vote per person, not per share, as far as I can see. It simply says people have to demand a poll. So no demand for a poll before the result and it's a show of hands.