Member Info for shychap

It's conjecture. Seems that even TW can get sucked into BB-style speculation. Until he, and the rest of us, know the numbers there's nothing that can be done. The subsidiaries were reported as doing fine at the half year. One or other may have slipped in HY2 but I don't think that's a firing offence, especially if, as inferred, the slippage is made up immediately after the year end. Plenty of other, better reasons to fire him.

Ashman did say via RNS on 14/8/25 that he would abide by disclosure rules so the assumption must be that he doesn't believe that Croda revenue data is price sensitive:

"Given the competitiveness of the industries that SkinBioTherapeutics operates in, the Company will not divulge information on individual customer sales or provide guidance beyond what is required by disclosure rules."

Directors can be fined, Toyin. Many PLCs have insurance against this. Shareholders pay the premiums, natch.

Toyin, I think we can agree that the NDA does not allow SBTX to withhold price-sensitive information. This much was confirmed way back in 2009 in the FSA ruling on Wolfson Microelectronics who had tried to argue that an NDA had prohibited it from releasing market sensitive news. Wolfson were fined £140,000.

However, there is some discretion in defining what is price-sensitive and SBTX may try to argue that disclosure of Croda revenues would not have been price-sensitive (positively or negatively), risible as that defence may be.

The regulators (SBTX is governed by both AIM and the FCA MAR rulebooks) can also permit a delay in disclosure of price-sensitive news if the issuer can satisfy the conditions, namely: 1) immediate disclosure is likely to prejudice the legitimate interests of the issuer; 2) delay of disclosure is not likely to mislead the public; and 3) the issuer is able to ensure the confidentiality of that information - see https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/forms/delayed-disclosure-form-guide.pdf

However, such permitted delays are envisioned in days, not weeks or months.

Also DTR 2.5.2 could be relied upon: "1. Delaying disclosure of inside information will not always mislead the public, although a developing situation should be monitored so that if circumstances change an immediate disclosure can be made. 2. Investors understand that some information must be kept confidential until developments are at a stage when an announcement can be made without prejudicing the legitimate interests of the issuer."

Then there is the weasel word in UK MAR Article 7 which defines inside information as "PRECISE, non-public, price-sensitive data that could impact financial instrument prices". SBTX may claim that it did not have precise data on Croda revenues until the year end…but the year end has been and gone.

I suspect it will boil down to different interpretations of what Croda revenues would be considered price-sensitive – with PIs claiming that any and all Croda revenues must be price sensitive, one way or the other and to withhold that data for so long must constitute market abuse. Whether SBTX can get away with based on their regulated warning to shareholders that no revenue data would be released until the results were published remains to be seen.

Agreed, Toyin, but that's what they said, with the nomad's approval so it remains our only official guidance.

It's possible they made an error in not allowing for the possibility that Croda revenues could be material and would therefore require a regulatory update. The other possibility is that they somehow knew back then that Croda revenues would not exceed 10% of total forecast revenue.

Suggest you read the RNS's, jansy - especially the one on 26/3/25:

"Due to the highly confidential nature of its business and market, shareholders will only see the impact from the Croda partnership upon our financial results at full year end…"

Whatever nonsense has been spouted since then, including by Ashman in back channels, this remains the official position which we all knew about.

Croda has surged back above the 3000 barrier this morning, as predicted.

Obsisian, no surprise that you have weighed in. You are tilting at windmills because I didn't denigrate your chum's product. But I understand the concept of inventing a straw man in order to repudiate it with an advertising diatribe.

That said, when I had access to your site I did note a lot of BB-type conjecture dressed up in fancy language as research. It wasn't a bad read but to me, it wasn't worth paying for or I would have stayed. And last week's big revelation, I understand from second-hand reports, was about Croda's need to trade gradually out of Matrixyl into Zenakine – a topic which I and others explored here six months ago or more.

Then, your researcher-in-chief has the gall to ask me a few hours ago in my own back yard to do some research for him into MD. These can't be the credentials of the "visionary analyst" about whom you eulogise.

I also think you'll find that he has led SBTX investors astray on several occasions by publishing fake news from Ashman – imho without being sufficiently rigorous in his cross-examination. These have ended up costing shareholders money and are part of the reason imho why the share price languishes below 17p.

But I confess that I have never read most of the other content there so perhaps the standard is higher than I saw.

Anyway, Ashman's recent and long overdue declaration by RNS that he would restrict himself to official comms channels going forward would seem likely to diminish the appeal of the Lemming's SBTX offering nowadays – leading to more BB-style speculation rather than horse's mouth insights.

Your assertion that I have some kind of vendetta against paywalls is another straw man argument. I obviously don't object to paywalls at all, having subscribed to one or two myself, as well as considering a subscription to Elric's site.

As for Elric himself, I don't know the man but I'm sure you are right about him when he is surrounded by his paying customers. But I have noticed on occasion when he posts here that his mask tends to slip when he is challenged or imagines a challenge. Civil Elric dies and is respawned as an immature and abusive playground bully who is almost certain to storm off in a petulant huff while threatening the ultimate sanction of filtering me, as if this were somehow unwelcome news for me.

If you don't like me objecting to the hyperlinked advertisements for his paywall service which are posted here by Elric or his missionaries, the solution is to abide by the forum rules and not post them.

No idea who Precedence Research are but they give Zenakine a mention as the most recent development in the booming skincare sector of the Cosmetic Polymer Ingredients Market, according to their $3,900 report : https://www.precedenceresearch.com/cosmetic-polymer-ingredients-market

I'll be watching this afternoon, AquaeSulis01; but if AI is any good at picking winners, the racing/betting industry dies. In my youth, I wasted £5 on a tip from the great Prince Monolulu at Sandown, since when I have never followed anyone's tips.

I too was at Longchamp in 2009 to see one of the greatest horses of my lifetime win easily. In those days I frequently went racing (and golfing and womanising) in Paris, Deauville, Cagnes-sur-Mer and Le Touquet. Happiest days of my life. But now I just watch on TV and don't bet on the horses any more as I get my adrenaline from the stock market.

My poker was in private games and live tournaments (mostly at the Queen Vic where I won a few). I switched to online tournaments when the clubs banned smoking but I missed the atmosphere and gave up playing years ago.

Kindred spirits indeed!

I don't know what's in MD's portfolio, AquaeSulis01 but my own is far from balanced. I have bet on horses and played poker for most of my life and I came to stocks and shares with the same mindset. Like many an inveterate gambler, I suspect, I wanted to win big or lose. Balancing a portfolio to try to ensure a modest profit at the end of the year is sensible for some but doesn't cut it for most gamblers. So I go big (for me) on a small number of potentially volatile stocks, none of which trades in the FTSE safe zones. I study them diligently and typically back only three or four runners, all of which have started to generate revenue in a growth market, have little debt, own decent assets/IP, have under 500k shares in issue, have attracted some IIs and seem to have the potential to become a takeover target.

I can't tell you that MD thinks the same way but he does appear to be something of a gambler…perhaps following through on a tip from a trusted friend. As part of my due diligence, I try to make it my business to talk to as many significant investors in my stocks as will agree to talk to me; and having spoken to MD on a number of occasions, I think he is somewhat eccentric/non-conformist, has a sharp mind and quick wit and seems to be a decent fellow whose punts are a lot bigger than mine. Perhaps we are both just old codgers trying to inject some adrenaline into our twilight years.

You aren't sharing your research elrico – you are sharing a link to the paywall where folk have to pay to read your stuff. Others on this BB do a great deal of research and share it free of charge with this community. I wouldn't even bother to object if the links to your paywall included fair warning that there's a sting at the other end – but that doesn't happen. The intention must be to deceive gullible investors into thinking your stuff is free.

I have said before that you have every right to charge a subscription for your stuff if people are willing to pay for it. But you don't have a right to advertise your business here with surreptitious links to a pay booth. Do you see other businesses advertising here? Even the good businesses with great products and services which we might all benefit from? So let us not be disingenuous about high minded notions of sharing your research when what you and your missionaries are doing is touting for customers. And I complain because I don't like to see anyone being taken for a fool. Many of us do know the score but newbies often don't – and may not even post.

I happen to appreciate the mission and content on TW's site, some of which is about SBTX, but I don't post links to it because it too has a paywall – and I complain if anyone does.

Of course, you are wrong to imply that I try to discourage others from discovering these resources: I only try to discourage the ticket touts from posting commercial links. I also turn off the ads in my web browser (as you possibly do too) even though they at least have paid to be there.

As for MD, I know nothing about any holding he may have in OPTI. And I can think of some obvious reasons why he didn't participate in the SBTX placing – including the showstopper that he didn't know anything about it. There are also sound reasons for buying after the placing if the shares drop below the placing price, notwithstanding the fundamental good news that prompted the placing and has yet to see the SP respond.

We can all agree that Ashman has disappointed on a number of fronts this year but the lack of Croda data is actually what we were promised at the beginning, and that is what we've got. The Superdrug delay is not material. And the forecast miss is a dog's dinner which indicates that our BoD aren't competent but nonetheless will see us making a hefty YoY advance. With so much to come in prospect, the miss should soon pale into insignificance.

In short, SBTX seems to be doing rather well in spite of Ashman's misleading/inept forecasts and targets. But for sure, it's not an easy sell to retail investors when key metrics are being denied to us. But even a blind man can see that the company has made giant strides this year – and some of us think it is probably worth investing in.

Your posts here are more welcome to me than most, elrico…when they come without hyperlinks to your paywall. And I respond in the same way to any post which I believe to be incorrect or misleading, so it's nothing personal although you keep trying to make it so.

When you say that you have never asked anyone why they have invested here, that obviously isn't true since you have just been asking why MD has invested. Since I coincidentally added another 150,000 shares to my SBTX holding on the 14th, he isn't the only one who feels that the recent dip has presented a buying opportunity. I wasn't averaging down but MD has been doing just that having initially bought plenty at around 24p. He just deals in bigger numbers than most of us. So no, I don't find it odd or noteworthy that he has been accumulating. But if you have anything more than wild speculation to bring to the table, please spit it out instead of talking in riddles.

I may be carrying a chiplet because of my disapproval of the attempts by some of your chums to rustle up Lemming business here somewhat deviously; and because one of your evangelists has repeatedly called me a liar for no good reason. He is obviously entitled not to believe me but not entitled to call me a liar. You will doubtless say that you are not responsible for the sins of others, even if they are your missionaries.

But you won't find any evidence of me abusing you or anyone. I focus on the business at hand and my writing style is plenty more civil than yours. In truth, I'm not here to make friends; and I don't care enough about you, or any keyboard warrior, to be outraged by any post. But don't dare to mistreat a cat or you will see a different side of me.

I'm not about to run errands for you elrico and I'm surprised that someone of your alleged researching zeal can't make contact with the man and ask your own questions. But he didn't invest in SBTX because of Ashman, who he hasn't met and doesn't know. So if he were to feel that Ashman is destroying or smothering shareholder value, he might not be supporting his re-election. And, if necessary, he has the clout to demand an EGM.

I don't understand why you view his recent purchases as oddly timed or sinister. It seems to me that you like to invent soap opera storylines to entice subscribers in.

Incidentally, the spread was 15.75/16.50 when the 800k were sold for 15.16 and the 500k buyer the following day was obviously happy to pay 16.25. So if we have correctly identified the parties, why did they not both do themselves a favour and deal off-market at, say 15.75?

This isn't guesswork since I have it from the horse's mouth: MD recently tried, via their respective brokers, to buy 1m SBTX shares from OPTI directly but was rebuffed on the alleged grounds that OPTI's SBTX shares were too cheap to sell at around 14.x. So MD is not pursuing your assumed strategy in building his stake.

A few days later, SOH (presumably) dumps another 800k SBTX on-market at 15.1p less commission when he could presumably have got a fractionally better price on an off-market deal. Doesn't make much sense - unless SOH doesn't like MD for some reason…or OPTI's finances took a sudden and unexpected turn for the worse.

I can assure you that MD has no inside information and nor is he interested in gaining control of SBTX. He has been buying since April and I recently posted a number of likely explanations for his recent purchases. His interests are aligned with yours and mine; and his voting power makes him a useful ally.

"Interesting reply from Croda. I would have thought that the full INCI list would need to be present to confirm it is zenakine i.e. Lactobacillus Ferment Lysate (and) Glycerin (and) Pentylene Glycol (and) Propanediol (and) Xanthan Gum"

-----

So, Croda's apparently legitimate reply to atlantic57 on ADVFN quoted by Toyin and advising to search only for "Lactobacillus Ferment Lysate" (LFL) was wrong, or deliberately unhelpful?

It's curious that the very thorough INCIDecoder list referenced by Toyin at https://incidecoder.com/ingredients/lactobacillus-ferment-lysate is unable to offer a description of LFL despite it appearing in around 1,000 products (including multiple Clinique, Dior and Guerlain offerings) most of which date from the last 1-2 years…whereas they do know what the similarly named "Lactobacillus Ferment Lysate Filtrate" is.

And yet, a search for "sleep" on the INCIDecoder site returns a long list of masks, serums, balms and creams, none of which (so far) include LFL, so maybe Zenakine hasn't hit the shelves yet.

"But what we are discussing here is the potential for a cosmetic business owned by SBTX to market a skincare product containing Zenakine sourced from Croda. I don't see any reason why Croda would object"

-----

You may be right ox123. But if SBTX has to buy Zenakine and the formulation from Croda, I'm not sure there would be any future in going head-to-head with the cosmetics big dogs. It would be a big risk to take just for the satisfaction of putting our name on the label.

Maybe you don't get it ox123 but any half competent CEO would have cleared his lines with Croda before spouting off to his shareholders about forecasts, targets and deadlines that Croda were never going to allow into the public domain. Whether due to incompetence, naiveté or market manipulation, Ashman is a liability going forward unless he changes his ways very quickly. And that will remain true even if the SP now takes off.

Obsisian, is that the entire article? If so, it looks like just a rehash of analysis posted here many months ago, by me and others.