The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Stt, on reading the RNS JP have 47 m exposure across their funds including 12.7 m equity swaps plus they have room to add
They are clearly very positive and their analyst and pm’s will be all over the company
Also,equity analysts do not operate in a vacuum- they talk to other analysts and as the market cap grows this will likely get on the buy lists of other asset managers
Saw the JP Morgan Smaller Companies Investment Trust has 11m shares- approx 1% position in a £280m gross assets fund- may also be in other JP funds
Good news👍
It’s a tricky one Pokerchips- you are probably right, AIM is a bit wild west
I just wish the FCA would get their act together on issues like insider dealing and regulating share issue processes
Razor, I think you are wrong on this- it is a very fair point that the Directors have chosen to be paid in salary (both around £1m) rather than shares.
This is a great growth story that is being ruined for ordinary investors by governance issues like remuneration and the cycle of dilutive placings
Yes- currently trading 30 but havn’t tested in size!
Pokerchips, the dilution itself is not so much the issue- many retail shareholders may not have the resources to put more cash in. The issue for me is the forced dilution- ie disapplying pre-emption rights in Resolution 1
I am personally convinced that the money will be used productively and feel that I should have the right to buy enough shares to maintain my % at the placing price rather than have some existing non- holders come in and take that upside away from me.
Lottie, Yes a rights issue would be a bit messy but could be underwritten with institutions taking a fee and picking up any residual from existing s/h demand
There is clearly some debate on this and am personally not fully convinced about management—but my view is that INFA has exciting potential However, if we continue down this cycle of dilutive placings, the benefits will fall to management, institutions and favoured shareholders with medium/ long term retail shareholders getting continually left out .
Plus was interesting to see the sp dip in the run up to May 4– feels like insider selling
The only way to break this is to vote against— There is clearly demand so the funding will get done either way despite the company warning.
Poker you missed the point- I am not complaining about the fundraise I am complaining about the dilution.
Tango, I am not convinced on that- HL for example is partly retail
PJT, My agenda is simply not to be continually forcibly diluted!!
Morgz, the funding will be done if we vote no- just in a more equitable way
Good Morning All, This is my first post here- I am a relatively new investor and have built up a decent holding over the past 6 months. The growth outlook for INFA is very positive in my opinion underlined by the Saipem contract and I am sure many more decent contracts to come in cruise/windfarm and defense. In addition the IM ML will hopefully come through soon
Unfortunately the impact of dilutive placings like this is to expropriate (steal)that growth from ordinary shareholders with favoured shareholders and Directors allowed to buy in to that growth at a discount. If this goes through, ordinary shareholders will never realise that future growth- it will be diluted away.... Clearly more funds will be required going forward with more dilution
Voting No here will result in a short term wobble in the price but the demand is clearly there and all shareholders should have pre emption rights ( ie not to be forcibly diluted),
This fund raise should be done as an underwritten rights issue in order to preserve value for all shareholders and imo, investors should vote against!!