Member Info for Spikeyj

by and large, i think TW does whatever drives
traffic to his website. but some interesting
snippets do come out of it sometimes. he
seems to have a terrible record as a tipster,
but does pick up on some frauds & scandals
quite well. he lacks personal charm. jmo.

soz, begbies traynor, not tranter.

i don't subscribe to tom w's bearcasts etc. , but
i notice that he has started to refer to aiden
earley again in some of the stuff tw sends out
when he tries to persuade peeps to subscribe.
tw is also talking about going to a meeting
of begbies tranter. ... might be connected?

"Deutsche Bank said the DAPA-HF results were "exceptionally impressive" and "likely mark a new standard-of-care for heart failure patients both with and without diabetes"."

soz, just £319, bargain, eh?

mcadder, would be a *very* expensive rollover
if so? - more than £320 charge for £5000 stock!

so far, they seem to be living up well
to the promise from the 25th july RNS:

"These results were accompanied by further positive pipeline developments, with the second half of the year anticipated to be an exceptionally busy period for the pipeline."

fingers crossed for more.

it would not be surprising if there is a shake for some
profit-taking soon-ish, but strategically it is performing.

most of the time, yes.

if a company CEO tells a pi privately, in advance,
*when* news will be coming out, that is in its own
right price-sensitive information, even if the pi does
not know whether the news will be good or bad.

if a CEO wants to tell the market in advance when they
will be issuing an update about something, they ought
to announce that publicly, to ensure a level playing field.

central problem with posters on these boards claiming
that they have been told X, Y or Z by a company CEO is
that there is no way for others to independently verify.

[please note, i am *not* suggesting that you are intending to
mislead or abuse the market by your own posts, just pointing
out that such claims about private communications from BoD
members have the *potential* for that, and can't be checked.]

and the same to you sir! live long & prosper.

(i think some of the newer posters on this board
simply don't understand what they have bought
into, and are just hoping for a spike to get out. in
particular, some of them just hoped to flip placing,
& probably didn't even look at company accounts.)

mxo 4th feb 2019 RNS:
"Operating costs and business objectives review
The Board has undertaken a full review of its operating costs and business objectives in order to ensure that the Company is best set up to execute its investment plan in the most cost effective and efficient manner with a core focus on preserving cash. The result of this comprehensive review has been a significant reduction in the monthly operating expenses, which are 66% lower than incurred in 2018 and, in turn, the cash burn rate of the Company. "

interesting way of putting it. they said that they have reduced the
operating costs, but do not comment on the "administrative expenses".

in the results to end 298, operating costs given as: £2,356,000.
results to end 2018, administrative expenses were: £1,620,000.

so did they reduce administrative costs in line with operating costs?
(in which case, surely better if they had actually said so?) or did they
reduced operating costs, but left the admin expenses little changed?

the quote above was quite cleverly worded. it would be easy for a
casual reader to think it meant that the overall cash burn rate for the
company was reduced by 66%, but that is not what is actually states.

"The result of this comprehensive review has been a significant reduction in the monthly OPERATING EXPENSES, WHICH ARE 66% LOWER than incurred in 2018 and, in turn, the cash burn rate of the Company. "

... so the 66% applies to the operating expenses, but overall effect on
corporate cash burn is simply "significant reduction", but no % stated.

hi bermondsey, thanks. i'll have a quick
rummage back through the mxo RNSs.

they've lost kim and lee as directors, so that
should save a chunk, but they've kept stefan on
despite adding OO as new CEO. so i'm curious
what the net effect is on overall renumeration.
they also announced previously that they have
a search under way for another NED, which
presumably won't come for free, as and when.

sam_ : "Since Wednesday 2th of Aug you only posted on adm energy board"

simply not true.

out of interest dan, could you explain please
what the source is for you believing that the
company has cut 60% of its admin costs since
those results end dec 2018? thanks in advance.
(& good to see folk willing to post re adme itself.)

would be helpful to know what stefan's current pay is.

market cap fell from £8,775,000 at 31 dec 2017 to
£1,663,000 at 31st dec 2018. ... but over that same
period, stefan's declared pay went up from £235,000
dec '17 to £282,000 dec '18. [good value for money?]

presumably the new CEO is getting a hefty whack. but
stefan is *still* on the board. has he gone down to a more
modest (!) five figure sum, or is he still earning six figures
despite no longer being CEO? quarterly cashburn purely
on remuneration alone is running somewhere between
£200K to £250K, disregarding costs for any other kind of
activity by this company (legals, consulting, admin, rent,
auditors fees, arranging & paying for equity raises & debt.)

altho' dan predicts profit by end Q1, company itself
only talked about 'targeting' being 'cash positive'.

no conspiracy theory needed re the current cash position.

just look at the accounts. unless they have done something
very radical indeed to slash the admin costs and wages bill
in 2019, they only have enough cash left for about another two
months. .... no conspiracy theory is needed, just arithmetic.

- so if they want to avoid administration, or trading while
technically insolvent, they have to raise a bunch more cash.

any of you guys on here want to stump up for another placing?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86URGgqONvA

E_AL, unless ADME raise more cash from somewhere very
quick, within the next 7-8 weeks, Peel will have to dump
20% of the stock because ADME will be heading into trading
while technically insolvent, which is a bit of a no-no, isn't it?

... unless Peel plan to hand over lots of cash to ADME themselves?

DH990, problem is, you are mentioning financial facts & figures.

usually, posters on this bulletin board just use it to post insults
& accusations about other posters and their motivations, rather
than post about actual assets, cash flow, etc. of the underlying
company. - you are blowing their minds with proper numbers.

generally, investors in this company like a 'big man' story to
follow, rather than analysis of costs, profits and liabilities. the
preferred story normally goes along lines of: [AN-other rich man]
has bought share in this, therefore LTHs can't go wrong being
long because shurely rich men never buy shares that go down?

that timescale will make it interesting for the warrant holders.
clearly, they would very much prefer to exercise well north of
here, and there can be plenty of volatility here, so all other
things being equal it would be a bit daft to exercise them
too quickly. but if other market participants do start to see
that cash count-down clock ticking with only 7-8 weeks to
go before it goes kerbung (or has another tiny, discounted
placing to keep the nostrils above water) easy to see that
the warrants might quite quickly slip out of the money.

decisions, decisions.