Member Info for slowlyslowly

Hmm... Two options here, assuming they pull this off and it gets as far as a shareholder vote. Shareholders vote for the RTO. Shareholders vote against the RTO.

If they vote for it, the board of AMC will be replaced by new execs currently driving the pharmaceutical company they want to merge with.

If they vote against it, the current board of AMC will remain in post, and shareholders will need to trust that board to wind up and return the cash to shareholders rather than keeping things ticking along.

Those with a negative view of the AMC board, why would you vote to retain that board and trust that they will now serve shareholders by returning the residual cash, rather than voting to replace that board with a fresh one that has a plan for how to use that money?

Fair enough. You won't be alone in just wanting the modest amount of cash returned. Although it won't be the board of AMC that you'll be paying going forwards, assuming it plays out as these things usually do - it will be the board of the target company.

Successes on AIM: Fevertree has done OK. Eurasia Mining did OK until the SMO / war - although that's a little close to the AMC bone. Celadon did well, but it's been a rocky trip so you had to time entry carefully - but don't you always. Rainbow Rare Earths is doing OK.

Pharmas: During the pandemic, Novacyt and Avacta did well. Avacta is an interesting one. They recently placed at 50p, which eroded a lot of the value before that placing. But they're still well above the 20p they held heading into 2020, and the cash from their pandemic work has opened up a fresh pipeline of development. I don't hold, but can see potential there. Tiziana did very well during its days listed in London - it's done much less well since moving across to the Nasdaq, so in some ways shows that an AIM listing is far from being a death sentence.

I didn't see your previous message by the way, I was typing my reply. "I'm still waiting" lol. Seriously? You don't get to demand that I answer questions. That's not how forums like these work - I don't owe people answers, information or opinions.

But you wanted an answer to the other half of your question: One example where an AIM board has delivered shareholder value. I can think of many. But I don't cross-ramp.

To answer your question: No, I don't work for AMC or any of their professional advisors. No, I don't actually hold shares in AMC. (I did, but sold before suspension). I have no skin in this game. I just saw people posting having misunderstood the purpose and mechanics of a reverse takeover, and thought I'd explain in case some readers find it helpful.

In essence, it's most similar to an IPO, when a previously unlisted company lists on the London market. In this case, it's a pharmaceutical company that wishes to become public. They do it by merging with an existing company that has no trading operation (Amur, in this case), rather than floating directly. The name will change from Amur to whatever they're called. The board will change from Amur's to the people behind the pharma. The management will be the people running the chemo tech development company.

It is the nature of a reverse takeover that it's frequently into a different sector, because the sector (mineral exporation) that the shell was in becomes irrelevant - AMC don't do that any more. We're just a listed shell, that's it. People who had read up on reverse takeovers before suspension would have known that it's rare for an RTO to be into the same sector as before.

When this is finalised, a prospectus will be issued explaining everything, just like for an IPO. It's then up to AMC shareholders to decide whether to vote in favour of the reverse takeover, or to vote against (hoping to push the company to wind up and return what cash remains to shareholders after costs). I'd just caution, as I said, the fact that AMC is a listed company is worth something. If this merger goes through, the cash AMC holds is still there - it becomes owned by the new company, and AMC shareholders would still own their share of that. If they complete an RTO, the value of the listing gets priced into the deal, so AMC shareholders get to keep that value too. If AMC gets wound up and capital distributed, you lose any value from the fact it was once a listed entity.

It's clear lots of posters here don't understand the purpose of an RTO by a cash shell like AMC. This is not the board and management of Kun Manie moving into pharmaceuticals. There is here a listed company. That status is worth something - it costs time and money to get a company through the hoops required to list on the London market. AMC no longer has any trading business (that's what it means to be a shell). But it is still a listed company, so if they can merge with a private company that wants to list, that private company has a cheaper and easier way to list on the markets than going through an IPO themselves. Most of the shares in the resulting company would be owned by the former owners of the other company, because they're the one that is worth something. But the current AMC holders all keep their shares too. The management of the new company would be the management of the pharma, and the board would also pivot. This isn't about Robin and others trying their hand at something different; this is them doing what they said they're do, and try to merge with a private company to allow AMC shareholders to extract the value there is in the fact they own shares in a listed company.

Channel is like a drill but laid horizontally on the surface - you literally cut out a channel of rock of similar width to drill core. Grab is where you find rocks of interest on the ground and take samples for analysis. Both have the advantage that you're able to find areas that look promising because you can see where you're sampling, rather than using geophysics and modelling to work out where to sink a drill bit. If you compare to a drill, you also get to start sampling at the bit you want to look at, rather than having to drill through less interesting rocks to get to the target. But both have careful rules that geologists follow to make sure that the sample is representative, and not skewed by cherry picking just the nicest bits in ways that would make the numbers meaningless.

What these two techniques give you is access to mineralisation at surface. That's helpful in so many ways. It's way cheaper than actual drilling, so it's more data for less money. It indicates gold at surface, suggesting open-pit potential without ruling out depth. If planning where to drill, you can go off models of the rock folds etc, and you can go off geophysics, but if you've actually found gold at the surface like this you've got so much more information about how the geology is already leading to mineralisation, so a way better chance that the drill bit will (literally) strike gold.

Drilling would be needed to confirm depth. But these two techniques can help establish width and strike length.

Surely, the day this can resume trading is closer than it was before today's announcement. Before, we were waiting to hear what acquisition they were planning. Now, we know what it is and a draft prospectus is already lodged. If they're hoping to get a formal prospectus issued in Q2, then if it all goes through I can't see it being a full year before this relists either.

Why is money spent on the mill regarded as wasted? Mark has said in interview that the mill is included in the assets for sale, so whoever buys this gets a mill included which means they don't have to buy one. Unless we paid over for it, we should recoup the cost of the mill in the sale price. In fact, a mill in the hand is worth two at the factory; having the mill already in Nicaragua means a buyer would be able to get to production much faster than if they had to procure and import one themselves.

@Slippery1, scroll down to my post of 17 Dec 2023 08:32

As I've said (not that I'm necessarily expecting everyone will believe me), the volumes this time are multiples higher than before.

In January 2021, the volumes were 1.6m shares on Monday 18th, 960k on Tuesday 19th, 210k on Wednesday 20th. By which time it had already dropped below Monday's highs.

This time, 4% of the shares in issue (8m+) went through last week, with 4 days in a row of many multiples of the average share price. To be exact, 1.29m, 3.39m, 2.06m, 1.29m. Granted, today was quieter at just under 500k.

His report is only available to people who have paid a lifetime subscription of $999. Will there be enough of them to buy 4% of the company between them, gaining 50% onto the share price in the process? Maybe.

I'm not saying it's definitely not his report that is moving this. It certainly could be. I'm just saying that the volumes were getting over longer are much bigger than in January 2021, so it's just not obvious to me that the current volume and price rising have the same cause.

Now I've clocked the date, I've found it. @Hirsch, this answers your question.

This article was published on Saturday 16th January 2021: https://www.resource-capital.ch/en/news/view/russia-relies-on-gold/

Then on Sunday 17th January, Swen Lorenz on his Undervalued Shares website released this: https://www.undervalued-shares.com/reports/investment-reports/strong-junior-mining-candidate-for-a-lucrative-bid/. You can't see there that this concerns Condor, because it's not even enough to have a monthly subscription to his website - you have to have taken his lifetime $999 subscription to get access.

But on 30th June 2023, his weekly update was https://www.undervalued-shares.com/weekly-dispatches/uk-takeover-targets-ideas-to-fuel-your-research/. That says amongst other things that "Undervalued-Shares.com Lifetime Members have access to a whole treasure trove of information on Condor Gold", which enables non-subscribers to join the dots and see what company he's referring to.

His website releases updates to his main reports. The one on 17/01/21 had shorter (from the file sizes) updates on 17 Feb 21, 11 Aug 21, 13 Dec 21, 15 Mar 22, 2 May 22, 12 Sept 22, 14 Mar 23, and ... 12 Dec 2023.

Ta Da! That last one was the day before the buying began in earnest last week.

Correlation need not imply causation. But everyone can now be clear which website / email it is. I personally remain sceptical that a website requiring a subscription at that level would trigger 4% of the companies shares (8m shares) to change hands, leading to 4 days of successive strong rises, given the initial report only achieved a quarter of that volume and the rally fizzled out half way through the second day. But I'll grant it is certainly possible that this is the trigger.

Thanks - sorry I missed the date in your earlier post, and thanks for your patience to put it again. I see the spike now. 1.6m shares on Monday 18th, 960k on Tuesday 19th, 210k on Wednesday 20th. By which time it had already dropped below Monday's highs.

I see someone else has asked for the name of the email newsletter in another thread. I too would be interested.

Hi immerso, when in 2021 was Condor tipped in this same email? Obviously I don't know what will happen next week, and the share price could retrace. But I'm questioning whether readers of an email newsletter would buy up as much as 4% of the shares in issue. That's just this week (8m volume); last week was another 5m. But if I look at the chart for 2021, the highest volume week was 4m, there was one at 3.5m, and a couple at 3m. But nowhere near the 8m we've just had, and even the relatively high volume weeks in 2021 did not have another high volume week adjacent. Which is why I'm wondering which week / month on the chart to look at for what you're suspecting is about to repeat itself.

I know I keep banging on about volumes. But before this week, the average daily volume here was about 170k shares, and about 700k shares a week. From Tuesday to Friday, we've done over 1.25m every day, with about 8.1m for the week as a whole, or just over 4% of the shares in issue. (Jim owns 24% of the shares). That's not just a spike caused by a few buys with no sells to offset them. That's pretty steady sustained buying across the whole of this week.

I've no idea who the buyer(s) is(are), but someone or some people are clearly positive and want to accumulate at this point. Here's hoping the asset sale is not too far away now

They've just raised £1.8m, so no

Some more delayed 100k printed - it's now just over 2m volume. Scrolling left along the chart, I can count just 16 days with volume over 2m, one of which was yesterday. So that's two days in a row with a steady rise on strong volume

Looks like about 1.7m volume done today, including a print for 100k @ 20p that just printed from 3.30pm. Not the record-breaking volume of yesterday, but still significant suggesting something more is building than just P&D. If nothing else, the volume yesterday and today is substantially higher from the last few times this has spiked. There's no history of leaks here, so it may simply be a case of funding now being sorted, so those who had held off positioning for fear of a fund-raise can now do so. Mark's recent interviews do suggest this could be the closing stages.

MrYFronts - just checking, you did do what Bella said, and click on the plus sign to expand the entry on 2/11/23 to see the follow-up actions?

@Connect1 - first buy Sept 2020