RE: No RNS9 Apr 2026 13:44
San,
Sorry to nit-pick but you use the word "should" in your post. The wording of the original RNS was "expect to". I would equate "expect to" with could, as in there is a possibility, rather than should, which implies a probability or duty. It is a fine line but I think the wording of the RNS was very carefully chosen. I suspect Ross Andrews at Guild will be pondering this exact point at the moment. Resignation of Guild as the company's advisor would result in the immediate suspension of the shares and to misquote Lady Bracknell, to lose one advisor.... but to lose two advisors:
RNS of 17/12/25
"Valereum Plc
("Valereum", "VLRM" or the "Company")
Resignation of Corporate Adviser and Trading Suspension
Valereum Plc announces that First Sentinel Corporate Finance Ltd has resigned from the role of AQSE Corporate Adviser to the Company with immediate effect. As a result, trading in the Company's ordinary shares on AQSE will be suspended from 7:30 a.m. on 17 December 2025.
The Company continues to work with Quorium Global Photonics SPC ("QGP") to conclude the recently announced transaction, and will announce a new Corporate Adviser in the coming days."
I know there are posters here who are very strong supporters of VLRM but any waverers reading these posts about recent events, or more accurately lack of events, might want to reflect on the possibility vs the probability. For the avoidance of any doubt I do not and never have held any shares in VLRM.
And to answer the obvious question: I follow because of similarities of VLRM with SYME. After all Cottle and Zamboni both ran circuses!