Member Info for semaphorRed

"Quite a difference."

Oh completely - I just meant it's irrelevant without hindsight.

Indeed. 1.2 or 1.29 or 1.8 is largely irrelevant long term.

The share price is unbelievably low when considering the data released to the market over the past week. Boggles the mind really.

Correct, and they have little connection to us anyway. And...are 99.9% down since inception.

"It can't be proven that I negatively impacted others' choices in taking up the offer, though I do know the company got my cash."

Hey man I'm not blaming you or anything I just think it's an interesting point. I mean, it can be proven that you selling into the market, any market, exerts downward pressure on the share price because that's what always happens. And you say the company "got your money". But they got the money of the nameless person who bought your shares in the market rather than buying them in the open offer. Again, this is just a theoretical weirdness of two competing markets for the same product.

"Can you explain? It enabled me to take up my allocation and the company to receive the funding, rather than me buying shares in the open market, which the company would have received no money from."

Quite correct, and this is a bit theoretical but your reasoning works both ways - if the share price and open offer price are equal, anyone can do this. Even the company itself, can fund itself - a bit like a reverse repo. Essentially you sold into the market, contributed to a lower market price and put that money into the company. But if you didn't, the market price would have been proportionately higher than the open offer price making what you did a worse deal for everyone else and encouraging uptake of the open offer.

"they had their chance of cheap stock and many blew the chance, as such they should not be given a second chance"

I don't think biblical vengeance against pensioners is the winning strategy you think it is.

"I sold a number of shares in the market to fund the open offer"

Don't think this does anything. Money is fungible. I think a major cause of the low take-up was indeed the proximity of the market price.

We have a product for every stage of their transition. And everyone else's.

MSC will have to refuel 100% of its fleet at some point soon. Maybe it won't be 100% bioMSAR but they can't stay with the status quo

No, and I very much doubt they'd be able to answer.

"An event we're promised a repeat of next month"

The probability of any long term pre-commercialised company have previously failed is roughly 100%.

"Could lightning strike twice?"

With a considerably lower probability, yes.

"So 4p in 4 months time???"

No, more. This is now, still, priced for bankruptcy. In fact it seems to be priced lower than that.

"we just do not need you -"

I wish people would stop unilaterally declaring the views of the shareholders

Does it then follow that rollout discussions for msar can begin now?

It's his birthday.

"A decimal point shift…. To the right"

At 15p with contracts signed, I'd be buying.

"Sorry I couldn't make it this year"

Is there anything you would've asked had you been there?

"So today we got confirmation that a Trial agreement WILL be signed in December with MSC and all the people are focused on, is potential funding...

So on such major news we get -4 % on the SP.."

I mean "will" will happen when it happens. And I don't want to be Deputy Downer here but I don't expect a significant SP rise on confirmation of this. Nor am I here for an SP of 3p so frankly I couldn't care less. I haven't put nearly a decade of investment in for a 30% return.

"Is that Lionel bloke not 46G who posts on here?"

No.

"the market reaction suggests"

No it doesn't.