Member Info for Spikeyj

got out with a little profit this afternoon. but now i thinking, was i out too soon? perhaps i have been an impetuous loon. good luck all still holding.

a little piece again

investors chronicle have this as a buy tip for take/over prospects, but jolly's question many months ago remains unanswered, still the directors seem sellers. c'mon BoD, make it a match.

well, good luck mr lithium, but be careful. i suppose there's a chance this is genuine, that would be nice, something is better than nothing (1p seems rather generous?) but be wary of giving out ID, contact & payment information. i imagine that boiler room operations would pay for a list of identifiable & contactable pis who deal in small cap shares harvested in this way. but all adults here i guess, so peeps can take own risks. gla.

shorters do not need to close out to make their money if the company is going to be dissolved. the short is not null and void when that happens, rather than shares become valued at zero when formally declared void. but it is possible that an impatient shorter who doesn't want to wait for the shares to be formally declared null and void through company dissolution might prefer to close out their position by otc purchase of shares while in suspension. only real logic i can see for doing that would be to avoid the [tiny] risk for the shorter that the company shares do end up being relisted and trading again still as Lond post suspension with some value being preserved for shareholders after all. the probability of that seems very, very, very low at this point. (i suppose the other motivation might be something fairly specific in a poorly drafted contract between a shorter and someone lending them shares which allows the lender to demand the shares back at a certain time, even if shares are in suspension -- but surely, any competent lawyer should have foreseen and prevented that contingency??) overall, does seem very odd that someone wanting to purchase effectively worthless lond paper does so via touting on an LSE bulletin board -- i find it very hard to believe that any professional agent needing shares for above reasons would not have much easier access to larger supplies of dud shares by other channels than touting to pis on bbs. so while I wish anyone here luck in trying to get even a small amount for tidying up, i do suggest caution in giving away any personal information etc. to this poster. it is also generally advisable to be careful about posting email addresses on the bbs, since they can be harvested and sold on which can generate spam etc. i am not sure whether or not these kinds of postings are permissible under lse bb rules, so i have reported them anyway just so that lse admin are aware that the bulletin board is apparently being used for this purpose, and they can take a view about whether or not this is a permitted usage from a newish and relatively unknown poster.

hi införthelonghaul. when companies need to raise money to develop their businesses. they can do that primarily through either (a) equity ( = shares), or (b) debt (= loans, bonds) .. with equity, those who lend the company money do so in exchange for a share in the potential profits ..... so they are given 'shares' in the company. if the company does extremely well, then the shareholders will gain a lot. but if the company does badly, there are no profits to share so they get nothing. ... with debt, those who lend the company money, for example by agreeing to subscribe for bonds with have a maturity of a few years, with a certain interest coupon per year, they *don't* actually get a share of the future profits, so they won't do that well if the company does brilliantly. instead, they have simply asked for a certain rate of interest to be paid back, in addition to repaying the loan amount. -- so debt funders are looking for less ambitious returns, but in exchange, they expect to be more shielded from the worst losses if things go badly. - so if a company fails and goes broke, some people will get paid their money back first, while others have to go to the back of the queue to wait, and will get nothing if the money from the sale of the company's assets runs out before it gets to their turn. because those who lent money (debt financing, e.g. bank loans, bondholders) didn't ask for a large positive return if things went well, the flip side of that is they do expect to get paid back first if the company fails. by contrast, equity holders (who owned 'shares') asked for a big return if the company succeeds, but have to settle for ** last ** place in the queue if the company fails. i.e the shareholders were greedy for bigger rewards, but pay for that by taking bigger risks. in the case of LOND, the company does indeed have assets which are worth some money, but when these are sold off, in the first instance the money is used to pay back people who simply lent the company money, in exchange for a certain interest rate. only ** IF ** there is anything left after that, then they would start to pay back to the shareholders, but sadly in practice with Lond, the loans were so high, that there will be nothing to pay back the shareholders. so in essence, yes the shareholders do own the company, but those who own debt *also* own the company, and have a *higher priority* to be paid back when it all goes wrong. (NB sometimes, certain categories of debt have priority over others... 'senior' debt holders are those who will be paid back first, if funds are limited, in preference to both junior debt-holders and share-holders.) bottom line, share holders stand to lose more than those who simply lend money.

.

(& i'm sorry for you on that. no joy to be had here.)

you have lost all your money.

a good lesson to learn, asif, one most of us can empathise with. me, still trying to practice my own particular learning point, don't buy too soon.

sure, cello doesn't seem to be a good way to get rich quick. but agree, interims pleasant enough, i'm happy to keep some as part of balance on the overall p/f. gla (not sure how many 'a' is ... quiet bb).

blimey, wot a quiet bb...

the rest: (tipped at 437) There are two main reasons Clinigen won rapturous support from investors when it arrived on the London Stock Exchange. The clinical trials market into which Clinigen supplies third-party material is growing at about 15 per cent a year. Secondly, Clinigen's management had a proven track record in understanding the complex regulation surrounding specialist access to certain drugs - encompassed by its global access programme (GAP) division. But at the start of 2014, when Clinigen released half-year results for the six months to December, concerns started to build about the shares overheating. The clinical trial supply (CTS) division - responsible for more than 64 per cent of first-half sales - revealed a 13 per cent fall in sales to £39.5m, and it didn't help that management admitted that a near four percentage point rise in the CTS gross profit margin - to 16.5 per cent - was 'unsustainable'. Consequently, the shares crashed 17 per cent on the morning the news came out. But the company still holds substantial promise for future growth and increasing shareholder returns. The specialty pharmaceuticals division, which provides a solid backbone and accounted for just over half gross profits for the first six months of the year, is still in an early stage of development, with management aiming to add six new drugs over the next three to five years. Meanwhile, the CTS segment is forecast to grow 5 per cent in 2015, and GAP, which accounted for 16 per cent of first-half sales, continues to be Clinigen's fastest-growing division. Encouragingly, chief executive Peter George says the lumpy nature of the CTS business and the drop in half-year sales was solely the result of strong comparative figures last year, which included a large number of low-margin anti-viral study sales. He also believes an overdependence on CTS revenues as the bulk of sales will soon be a thing of the past. A bullish trading update released at the end of July has already begun the re-rating of the stock. In it, Clinigen said it expects like-for-like sales growth of more than 7 per cent for 2014, with total revenues of no less than £126m. The GAP division is expected to report 50 per cent sales growth, and CTS should see revenues up more than 11 per cent in the second half compared with the first half. Continued improvement in gross margins across all the divisions also contributed to a 17 per cent improvement in underlying cash profits as at the end of June, suggesting full-year results should beat analysts' expectations. Such a solid performance could be down to lower operational costs, and the keen prices paid for two newly acquired speciality pharma drugs: Cardioxane and Savene. And management says there is also significant potential in Clinigen's new business pipeline for CTS and GAP which broker N+1 Singer puts at about £200m. CLINIGEN (CLIN) ORD PRICE: 437p MARKET VALUE: £361m

they trying to bring the price down to fill your order chas?

spamming garbage about trv across 3 bulletin boards so far. your posts reported.

of amino in this interview http://citywire.co.uk/money/gervais-williams-quindells-business-is-fine-but-im-worried/a768394

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/shares/11051385/The-11-cheapest-value-stocks-on-Aim.html

- just shows a bit the part luck has to play at times on aim. i sold out b/c i feared contagion of ebola panic into mwa sp. but probably the fall here was simply about rns content leaking early. so i did well and am happy, but probably from the wrong rationale.

thanks, always appreciate your thoughts on value.

morning jolly, may i ask, what's your take on today's numbers? seems consistent with the long-term value to me, (a less numerate creature than yourself) tho' no sweeties or fireworks to excite or dazzle s/term. i have added a small number again on this morning's drop, tho' am still underweight compared to previous holding.