Member Info for ronmcdonald

I voted NO to all. Thieves.

I received a swift reply from Alice & Lianne at TissueRegenix@walbrookpr.com . Contact them

You can also complain to those quoted in the RNS

For more information, please contact:

Tissue Regenix Group plc

Jay LeCoque, Executive Chairman

via Walbrook PR

Cavendish Capital Markets (Nominated Adviser and Broker)

Geoff Nash/Giles Balleny/Edward Whiley

Nigel Birks - Life Science Specialist Sales

Harriet Ward - ECM

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7466 5000

Walbrook PR (Financial PR and IR)

Tel: +44 (0)20 7933 8780

Alice Woodings / Lianne Applegarth

Tissue Regenix@walbrookpr.com

If the deal is rejected Harwood can’t put the company into administration with 22%. They should seek a fire sale if they want to seek the best value for shareholders (big IF)

You can vote online via your stockbroker - no need for signalshare

It’s even worse- they’re giving the company away for under £1M. For 800k they get 92% of the company. Robbery. And they’re asking us to vote “yes”.. LOL

You can still be shareholders just not on AIM - but the value of those shares will be ZERO. Oh, you can trade them back using the matchmaking tool for at least one year - but who will buy them and for what price?? Your investment is now zero whichever way you look at it - so vote “NO” even if in vain.

Reject the deal - vote “NO”. If you’re going to lose all your investment anyway, why give a bunch of cowboys the pleasure of your approval? Let Harwood sink too, or force them to find a better deal I.e. a fire sale

One of the resolutions approved at the AGM last week was to allow TRX to issue dividends... interesting timing. Buybacks would be more effective once in profit in my view. But maybe reading this wrong

Catalyst could be profitability at the net income level for the first time ever this year

I actually disagree, and the text you've copied from the announcement has been included in all updates. Regardless of the delays in the process due to the Mexican issue (clearly a red herring), my broker (ii) closed the option to accept the offer last week, so I assume its results, including my rejection to the offer, have been communicated to BCN/GF. Similarly, I assume most other brokers would have followed suit, hence the jump to 56.6%. So who is left to vote? If GF cannot reach the 75% to delist (let alone the 90%), but are able to commit to developing BCN to production by acquiring BCN, the remaining shareholders are likely to be in a very good position. I guess we will find out soon.

If GF cannot reach the 75% threshold to delist from AIM - those PIs holding on will see this share explode in my view

Does anyone know what % of the issued share capital is owned by management? I'd like to find out if they control over 75%, and I could only find the CEOs c.40%...

The website to follow for CNEL is: http://www.zkty.com.cn/ but I'm not sure if it's up to date.
One of the reasons for the limited news to investors is the lack of a new investor relations team in HK, which was supposed to be set up from London after the listing. But I imagine quarantine etc has slowed things down. And with no IR team -> no announcements...

That is true, Ian.B, and I understand the theory. But in practice, let me give you the example of TRX (10 june):

"The nominal value of the Company's shares is currently 0.5 pence which is higher than the Issue Price. As the issue of new ordinary shares at a discount to the nominal value of those shares is prohibited under the Companies Act 2006, it will be necessary to undertake a capital reorganisation ("Capital Reorganisation") to enable the Company to issue new ordinary shares in the future (including the New Ordinary Shares) at a price which is less than the current nominal value of an existing ordinary share.

It is proposed that each of the Existing Ordinary Shares be sub-divided into:

(i) one new ordinary share of 0.1 pence each in the capital of the Company; and
(ii) one deferred share of 0.4 pence each in the capital of the Company."

As I said, it would need a special resolution and a share split, which I used to think was unusual...

Are you sure NSF cannot issue shares below the nominal 5p? I've seen at least two examples (only in the last few weeks!) where companies issued below their nominal value via share splits and special resolutions... also, having followed NSF boss JVK, I think it's likely he'll go big, placement AND rights issue, involving everyone and anyone! AIMHO

When will the *Excess* shares be awarded and begin to trade? I can't find it in any RNS... anyone know? Many thanks

Thank you, Idiot441. Great post.

My concern, other than the obvious, is that we (and the BOD) assume ARB is one of the most efficient miners in the world. But if the majority (65%) of all miners are in China, where electricity costs are not only extremely low but are also subsidised by the government, and staff salaries, warehouse / land / hosting costs are also very low -> how can ARB claim to be one of the most efficient miners in the world? ARB may have the most efficient *machines* (except for Z11s), but that doesn't make it the most efficient mining *operation* if all other costs are much higher than in China.

My point is that while ARB needs to consistently buy new machines to remain efficient, the Chinese are happy to run old machines as it's almost free to run them. And the proof is in the hash rate - it hasn't dropped with the halving. In fact, it's reaching new record highs @+141 EH/s (June 26), which we weren't apparently going to see until the end of 2020!

And the worrying thing is that at current BTC prices ARB is *not* making a net profit - as just revealed by Idiot441 - which means no returns to investors. The BOD talks about mining margins and EBITDA etc, but when you take into account the consistent purchase of new machines and their fast depreciation - ARB sadly doesn't make a profit. Which means it can only hope for a BTC price rally if it wants to make profits and boost the SP... AIMHO and very happy to be corrected if I'm misunderstanding something!

The scenario you describe will only generate MORE sub-prime customers as evidenced in the 90s & 2008 crises, so NSF is absolutely in the right place - the problem is NSF itself, biting more than it can chew just before covid

I don't think people question the fundamentals of SLP. I think the question is whether SLP's operations will be disrupted again in the immediate future given a second lockdown seems inevitable in SA, which is one of the few places in the world (in my opinion) where the second wave is grossly underestimated. It will be brutal in my view, like San Francisco in 1918. So why invest now if the SP is likely to fall further independent of fundamentals? AIMHO