Member Info for sellonnews

There is to be a pre IPO raise in January for up to £1 million depending on number of 2.2p warrants exercised, so it could be £500,000 sought if all warrants exercised, at 3 point something p (Rayofhope). It is suggested that 3.5p would encourage all warrant holders to exercise before they are timed out. No point in issuing more at this price, despite any demand because of the full IPO scheduled for March 2019 to raise between £2 million and £4 million (Tabither09). This could be at over 5p. Which makes it pointless issuing warrants with any future funding, unless exercisable at double the issue price - why have a flood of 3.5p warrants coming onto the market with a 5p-plus IPO forthcoming? It makes no sense imo.

Lionsgold is at a stage now whereby any placing can be made on the merits of the product and definitely not on a future business idea, as in the past! If further funding is needed, do it when the share price is 10p, 20p, or more.

If institutions want to invest, all good, but at least let shareholders have an opportunity to do the same, and not on a ridiculous 1-for-50 or so basis.
.
.
DYOR
.
GL
.

TRAC, subsequently renamed TALLYMONEY, was paid for in LION stock, and as such the erstwhile shareholders of TRAC became shareholders of LION - there is therefore absolutely no problem in renaming LION as TALLYMoney as there are no TRAC shares in existence... not too difficult to comprehend, is it b1gdeano (smiley)

"Lionsgold has therefore allotted a total of 57,995,304 New Ordinary Shares in Lionsgold to the shareholders of TRAC who held the remaining 1,032 (45%) TRAC shares not already owned by Lionsgold"
.
.
DYOR
.
.
GL
.

Rayofhope

What I found interesting from Tabither09's excellent update was the pre-IPO funding, which if at 3.5p or above (your observation - 3 point something) would certainly be persuasive in having the 2.2p warrant holders exercising before expiry at the enf of January. It has to be hoped that no further warrants are issued with either this, or the proposed March 2019 IPO funding (possibly at 5-plus p?).

Was there any mention of the 1.2p warrants being exercised/called-in?
.
.
GL
.

Couldn't there be a name change from Lionsgold to Tally Money with the two mining assets continuimg as subsidiaries? It was, after all, a reverse takeover.
.
.

djwall1s

Wasn't that from his meeting on Monday, as a non-exec?
.
.
GL
.

No need to worry if the shares are suspended pending an RTO.
.
.

As a cash value was ascribed to the deferred shares, wouldn't this give a nominal of 0.1p for all unissued shares subsequently held?
.
.

samadhi1978

The problem is not in the fact that this was done but under what authority. There was no reference to this ability in the resolutions of the EGM, January 15 2018, nor in the Gibraltar Companies Act 2014, nor the Articles, that I can find.

Please be so kind as to provide the relevant details, which I'm sure will be given to you as a TR-1 holder.

TIA
.
.

Interestingly the 704,988,102 deferred shares had a value of £2,819,952.41 for the company.

.
.

.
.

*Should read, every ordinary share came with one deferred share, not four.
.
.

In essence, subsequent to consolidation, every ordinary share held, sold, or purchased came with four deferred shares attached, ie owned by the shareholder,

Correctections welcome.
.
.
DYOR
.

144.
(1)
This section applies in relation to the variation of the rights attached
to any class of shares in a company whose share capital is divided into
shares of different classes.
(2)
Where the rights are attached to a class of shares otherwise than by the
company’s memorandum, and the company’s articles do not contain
provisions with respect to the variation of the rights, those rights may be
varied only if
–
(a)
the holders of three
-
quarters in nominal value of the issued
shares of that class agree in writing to the variation; or
(b)
an extraordinary resolution passed at a separate general
meeting of the holders of that class approves the variation
,
and any requirement (however impo
sed) in relation to the variation of those
rights shall be regarded as complied with to the extent that it is not
comprised in subsection (2)(a) or (b).
.
.

"A smart man makes a mistake, learns from it, and never makes that mistake again"

Wondered why there were no comments about the presentation haha However, all shareholders are entitled to the same information, not just those who can attend a meeting.

(In haste, the wrong date was entered into meetings spreadsheet - will obviously not rush details again)
.
.

When will shareholders who were unable to attend last night be given this information? Aren't all supposed to have this as a right?
.
.

So, any upcoming deal would constitute a reverse takeover, something which was dismissed as 500k for 250k value! Clarification please.
.
.

Now there's thought, a blind IPO where potential investors haven't got a clue about why the Company needs funds and its current situation.

That'll work (smiley)
.
.

From there,

"A lot of hours are being worked by a lot of people on IPO"

Another placing coming? At a premium to delisting price would be expected, given all the work done.
.
.
DYOR
.
GL
.

Placing coming? Better not be discounted!!!

"A lot of hours are being worked by a lot of people on IPO"
.
.
GL
.

All that's needed now are the AGM resolutions!

djwall1s, you might be surprised that most would earn that salary within 10 years.
.
.
GL
.

Only problem re: NEX is documentation - there isn't any.
.
.