Member Info for rossannan

Wolster

“Also its just as ludicrous to base the Selling Price on any multilpe of 12p (a share valuation based on II's selling for years on the back of a weak mangement team dishing out free shares for the boys & the odd duster - which was undoubtedly shorted to death) just garbage.”

Okay, if it is ludicrous, where are the ones taken out at more than twice their “starting price”? This time it’s different? Really?

YorkshireLife

Yes, there are certainly plenty of examples of companies being taken out at nearly (or even at) twice their “starting price”, but where are the ones taken out at more than twice their “starting price”? This is why I am a little sceptical about 25p+.

Juxtapose

I specifically asked on the ADVFN BB for examples of a company being taken out at more than twice the share price that it was at when it became clear that it was in play. So far no-one has ponied up such an example. I note that some posters on here have referred to Ophir - I can imagine that little bit of history repeating itself here. I just don’t see how we get from 12p to some of the figures being bandied about on the BBs. 20p? I should hope so. 25p? Could happen. But even 30p is really stretching it, IMO.

Time will tell. Good luck to us all.

ltron

I cannot help asking myself how often a company is taken out at more than twice the share price that it had when it became clear that it was in play. Not often in my experience, so I take any chat about anything more than 25p with a large pinch of salt.

This is not to say that I am even remotely interested in selling at the current share price - no chance! - but it will be interesting to see if any of the Sunday papers put a figure in pence per share on that non-binding approach or can cast any light on any of the other scenarios that the RNS refers to.

LGO-fan

Good luck with extracting that loan from LIND!

goupplease

I seriously hope not because CERP could only pay for it by issuing shares - I would then end up with a significant holding in CERP! Nightmare!

Disc0verer

Fair point - Bonasse appraisal wells it is from now on. No personal gain or ulterior motive involved though, just trying to save potential newbies from the local rampers and the local rampers from themselves. Not trying to call it either up or down, just trying to call it right. Annoyed that that pesky Leo Koot isn’t letting me have a Q2 update to get my teeth into though!

CaptainSwag

The new country entry will interesting - how the MWOs are to be funded will be quite crucial.

philipy

But why ignore someone who is making valid points? I was right about the Q1 update and am still waiting to be proved wrong about the Q2 update, which LK now appears to have bottled.

countdemonet

Or you could try to come up with valid counter-arguments instead of insults. Those backing the bull case here maybe need to show newbies that they have more in their lockers than just name calling.

faz7475

Not only to scare of newbies but hopefully to dislodge o few LTHs as well. Something is not right here. I know that I bang on about the continuing absence of a Q2 update, but if it is true that Leo Koot has decided to ditch this, that has to be a major red flag. Why? Because folk were asking Leo Koot for more RNSs, not fewer, certainly not to ditch the core quarterly updates. This move just looks disingenuous and opportunistic to me - we know that Leo Koot’s performance in terms of production and keeping the business adequately funded has been pretty appalling, and now he seems to be telling folk that he will be keeping these failures under wraps! And they just take it! There is still money to made here by nimble traders surfing the waves of sentiment but this does not look remotely investable.

MrMagoo31

It is possible that your posts do more to scare of potential newbies than my sceptical musings ever could. At this rate you may even make some of the LTHs have second thoughts. Keep up the good work!

MrMagoo31

No, you said that the SPT regime does not apply to the SWP. You were wrong. Own it and move on.

Your paramount concern should be the continuing absence of the Q2 update and what this may be telling us about the CERP BoD’s approach to information management.

HH

No, if you are quoting him correctly, he got it wrong. End of.

Wow! You would think that he would understand the difference between what mitigates PPT and what mitigates SPT!

HH

Of course CAPEX can be used to mitigate SPT, the point is that MrMagoo31 was contending that the SPT regime did not even apply in the first place.

But if you are quoting Leo Koot correctly it was pretty misleading of him to suggest that anything other than CAPEX can be used to mitigate SPT. Historical tax losses certainly can’t. Leo Koot really is more of a salesman than an oilman.

MrMagoo31

How old are you?

Why not just admit that you were wrong and that the SPT regime does apply to the SWP. You have over £100K invested here - you should be right on top of stuff like this.

MrMagoo31

I did, a long time ago. You clearly haven’t done yours.

MrMagoo31

Really? The SPT regime does not apply to the SWP? Are you sure?

MrMagoo31

Again with the insults, but you did at least raise the issue of tax. So what about the punishing SPT regime - does it apply to the SWP?