Member Info for Rooky

Selecta6,

Although I never give advice re investing in a company, I do sometimes give a list of posatives/negatives as then the facts/possibilities speak for themselves.

But what I would advise, is never invest on any opinion of someone like Scotty, who has posted 5 very short, none connected points.

Far better to research all that is known about the company and their products.

Agree this RNS is good news, but looking at recent comments, I think we accept it only goes part way to solving the board/warrant problems.

Re the following extract.......The Board confirms that a General Meeting will be convened early in the New Year in order for the shareholders to consider approval of the placing related issue of warrants as announced on 18 December 2020, with further announcements being made upon posting of the requisite notice.

I will hold off submitting a file to the FAC, until I see the results of the planned meeting, but if I still consider that the outcome is detrimental to myself as a shareholder, and that the actions of the board still warrant scrutiny by the market/financial regulator, I will not hesitate to forward said file.

Prior to such submission, I will consider the general opinions of others.

Hi Jarus,

A general, simple fact that has to be proven in AIM as well as main market quoted/dealt shares is 'Was anyone mislead, or likely to be mislead in investing in any companies listed in either market.

I give no personal view on any specific company.

As like most, I am only too keen to get back to discussing the products of RMS, including the masks of course, I will keep this short.

It is not as someone suggested, the shareholders responsibility to prove any wrongdoing, that is the FCA's responsibility.

What we perceive as evidence, that possible wrongdoing has occurred is all that is required, to be supplied to the FCA, who will then peruse that perceived evidence and decide if further investigation is required or/and warranted.

I mention perceived, as what many perceive as evidence is only in fact suspicion, based on their view of facts that are known.

I have no experience in civil law, but was involved in criminal law for 26 years, and whilst fully accepting that there are differences, there are also many crossover points.

Won't comment further re the above subject, unless things escalate.

Good luck and a prosperous New Year to all.

I had already considered to start to collate possible evidence to prepare a case to the FCA.

Whilst I appreciate the angry group on here, and include myself in that group, I know from my pervious experience in my dealings with the FCA that an in-depth comprehensive report has far more impact that individual complaints.

As mentioned in a previous post, I compiled such a report on behalf of a group of shareholders re a company we were invested in, so in the instance being discussed, I am happy to leave such a report to others, but will happily back such a report.

What I had never excepted from the FCA is that if they find against either a companies board as a whole, or any individual, they only notify the complainant if any breach of the regulations are found to be serious enough to warrant public exposure, so be aware that not all breaches found proven are released into the public domain, nor is the actual complainant informed of the out come.

I only found out months later that, if no action is deemed necessary, the complainant is informed, so I took from that, that as I had not been informed of the outcome , that my complaint had been deemed inappropriate for result comments, but action had been taken (reprimand/warning or/and fine), but that action had not been deemed serious enough for the decision to be released.

So much for open, justice.

Cheers Tame2017

For the second time in recent months my portfolio is wrong at it is showing 'All' my holdings in PHE have vanished, putting all my profits made on PHE as a total loss.

Is it just me, or is this being experienced by anyone else.

Cheers and a Merry Xmas and a very very prosperous New Year.

Hi Frannie,

Appreciate re where RNS can be found, but it threw me re the RNS Reach mention.

Bit confused here.

What RNS has been released, I can't find one.

Will mean I can dribble a few more hundred quid back into PHE every month.

Sold a few yesterday at the top, which is unusual for me (about 5% of my holding).

Did I sell because I am loosing faith, not at all.

I sold just enough to pay of what was left on my mortgage, and I expect the good times for those holding to continue.

I post the above, because often we read posts querying, why sell if you believe, but I found the fantastic rise yesterday, to good a chance to miss.

I intend to hold on to my remaining shares very tightly.

If the sp stays up today, that will be four consecutive days that is has risen.

Accept that, nor the rise is exceptional, but it is nice to see a few days of upward movement.

Wondering if it's anything to do with the testing of the new variant Covid 19 virus.

Hi Rebel100,

No idea re TB as my post was a general comment.

I rarely look at Twitter due to it being such as easy platform to put double meanings.

I disagree that Dr Cave did not do wrong, 'but' I feel that this was more in ignorance than intentional.

Officially undisclosed comment are very rarely uttered by company board member as they are far more used to the market rules than someone who is chiefly an advisor to a company due to his expertise.

My view is that excitement got in the way of prudence and his comments were not intended to mislead.

As to the board, the best advice is that unless you have proof, hold your counsel as it could cost you far more than your holdings in RMS could make.

Also of course remember that there are correct channels for persons to complain to if you feel that market rules have been broken, and as long as you show/put facts and not views, any complaint has a far better chance of being scrutinised.

I have some experience in such matters due to a complaint I made about 10 years ago, about a companies (not RMS) board.

john389,

The disparity on Tradegate and the LSE is down to the full book being open on Tradegate, whereas a couple of MM's have not yet opened onto the LSE book.

Companies who's share price moves as PHE's has over the last couple of days, often put out such as todays RNS, and if they don't the market authorities could request that such a RNS is released.

In doing so they are covering themselves against accusations of insider dealing, IE there is new news out there, that they are hiding from the public domain.

To me it shows integrity, it also does not mean that news is not imminent,

Although it might just adjust the sp down a tad, it shouldn't as to my mind it shows that the PHE ship is still sailing a straight line to prosperity.

Whilst I have often posted that I accept all well balanced, thought out views for and against, I can't believe the rubbish that some are posting on here, all which if I could be bothered is easily argued against.

My question is, would you bother carrying on a conversation with these (obvious agenda) people if you met them anywhere else but on these share chat forums, or would you just think that it would be a waste of breath, and walk away.

I was going to comment on larryh's post at length, but won't waste my time and energy.

All I will say is, his post is 100% utter rubbish.

One of the quickest I have ever put on ignore, not because his post is negative, just that his/her motives are obvious.

Hi Reece,

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Never the less, a profit is a profit.

Hope you are still invested, if not I still feel that the sp is only just getting going.

Leaving aside that no doubt we all have differing varied views on these tier lockdowns, I would think that many would not disagree with the compulsory wearing of masks in busy public areas.

So why doesn't the government take the simply decision to instruct/advise (not usually one for a diktat government) to do as such.

I am sure it would not annoy the public anywhere near going as to going from one tier, then back/forward to what are lockdowns by any other name.

Whilst accepting that it would be difficult to Police, (IE any definition of a busy public area) I think many would be persuaded to join the minority that already wear masks in such areas.

I dislike wearing a mask, but have done so when and where it was deemed to do so, and recently being fed up of the small minority not keeping their distance either when queueing outside premises or/and those walking within touching distance as they pass, even when there is plenty of space, have started wearing a mask in most public situations.

My mask of choice, now lets think.

A mask that assists in stopping the spread or contracting the Virus that you have to dispose of after every wearing event (or should do), a similar washable mask that can cost several quid or one that actually kills the Virus, and can be worn for several hours at a similar or less price.

I strongly believe that compulsory mask wearing in the UK is just around the corner, as it is in many countries, so the market for the P2F mask is massive and I can see the only problem being supplying sufficient quantity, hence the licencing method of the technology will be a forgone conclusion, if of course it passes all the tests/certifications required, which I believe is very probable.