Member Info for Stuartrm

Verdane are offering 111p. The only reason that they are offering this is because they think AUGM is worth more. Given the currently volatile situation, of which they are well aware, they are not looking at a valuation that is a couple of pence more. They are looking at a very comfortable margin to cover their (AI related and geopolitical) risk. They will have undertaken their own valuation and come to the conclusion that at 111p they will make a very handsome profit - maybe not immediately, but in the foreseeable and not too far distant future. Personally, I would be inclined to put more trust in any such longer term assessment than any short term valuation that might be produced by agentic AI, or any other number cruncher. We clearly do not know the number that Verdane has arrived at but I think we can be confident that it is tens of percent more than 111p. I intend to sit tight and graciously decline their kind offer.

GreenEyes1. You state "The board must see a big weakness down the line otherwise why accept such a low offer. (sic)". You also state "I was looking at a few of the top holdings recently and they seem to be flying,..." If the second statement were correct, it would seem unlikely that a problem with one investment company could cause a 'big weakness' in the portfolio as a whole. This being the case, there would need to be problems with several of the investments, for which there appears to be no known evidence, or a more widespread 'market-wide' problem to cause any such weakness. There is some evidence of market-wide concerns relating to geopolitical issues, tariff instability, AI bubble concerns and over-extended borrowing by governments, but it is unclear (to me at least) whether the Board of Directors of Augmentum would accept a low bid based on such concerns. I would be interested to hear the views of others on this subject.

In that case, Steph, could you please sell in a number of tranches over the next few weeks so that we are guaranteed a sustained rise?

Although the press imply that this is a done deal, it will be necessary to get 75% of shareholders to vote in favour. Many, as do I, seem to think the offer is low. Having waited a long time for Augmentum to produce results, as the pundits in the financial press seem to think that the tide is finally turning in favour of smaller companies, I am prepared to vote "No" and wait a bit longer. Alternatively, as has been suggested by others, a better and more realistic offer might be forthcoming.

I congratulate the management on the clarity of the RNS. Rather than give woolly "relative to market expectations" type statements like so many companies, without making it clear what their understandings of those expectations are, this RNS makes it clear what the management are using as the basis of their predictions.

I have just looked on the Renalytix webpage under news and RNS and there is nothing. Where has the information discussed been published?

The update is very encouraging but I am a little surprised that the Board has given such firm figures. While certain aspects of the business are generally within their control or are relatively slow moving, the price of gold is neither, being liable to change rapidly, in either direction, depending (amongst other things) on the decisions made by a certain president on the other side of the Atlantic. Personally, I would not get too excited too soon, albeit history shows that the management of this company is sound.

Re "could this share make you a millionaire?", the answer has to be yes. The part that is unclear is whether the question is being asked of a billionaire, or of someone who has less than a million pounds. As always, the devil is in the detail.

Please ignore the reference to Nasdaq compliance in my last post. The information, which I got from AI, muddled Renalytix (the first two dates) with a different Renx. Sorry about that. I only realised once I started to delve further.

Upcoming Financial Calendar

Trading Update: Expected February 2026.

Quarterly Earnings Release: Scheduled for 26 March 2026 (covering the period ending December 2025).

Nasdaq Compliance Deadline: 27 July 2026. Renalytix has until this date to regain compliance with Nasdaq's minimum bid price requirement of $1.00 per share.

Tuan6 suggests that the banks who lend to companies and we, the shareholders, share the same risks. I beg to differ. Yes, we all share a risk of not getting our money back but the banks are at the front of the queue for recouping what they contributed if things go wrong whereas we, on the other hand, are right at the back of that queue.

The headline looks good but the detail does not look so good. Heading in the right direction? Yes. Very positive? I am not convinced. It seems rather slow compared with the great expectations of prior years.

Love him or loathe him, one thing that President Trump does is keep a close eye on the markets. One can therefore be reasonably confident that while the path is unlikely to be smooth, the long term trend (for US markets - he doesn’t give a damn about any others) is likely to be upward.

Hopefully today’s RNS about TVG will be a shot in the arm, so to speak, after the rather dismal IC article last week. FIPP companies have provided several encouraging reports recently. We wait with bated breath to hear from FIPP how these positive developments can be monetised sufficiently to keep the organisation afloat.

In May 2021, the SLP share price hit £1.43. The price of platinum, however, was about half what it is now (in $US). Might we see a further significant increase in the SLP share price or is that just wishful thinking?

An 11% ……….,

A 11% share price fall on a dilution of just over 1% appears to be a bit excessive.

I don’t like this bit of the RNS in particular:-

“The Company also intends to raise further funds in early 2026 (the "Potential Further Fundraising") and is in discussions with strategic partners in this regard. There can, however, be no guarantee that the Potential Further Fundraising will be successful nor the timing or terms thereof.”

It sounds like death by a thousand cuts. Any views?

Couerdelion. I also found little of immediate comfort in the results. There are many warm words that suggest jam tomorrow, along with a qualification to the accounts that implies that tomorrow may never come, at least not without a serious share dilution. While I can accept that companies at the early start up stage are cash sinks that rely on raising funding as they develop marketable products, more developed companies such Alusid and Pulsiv, which already market successful products, should be able to provide meaningful financial data to enable their value to be estimated. Such data is absent from the FIPP results and until it becomes available, any value that FIPP might have cannot be estimated with any confidence. Surely the BoD, as a significant investor in these companies, has access to some of this data, and some of it could be released to improve shareholder confidence.

"Duke Capital Limited (AIM: DUKE), a leading provider of hybrid capital solutions for SME business owners in Europe and North America, is pleased to announce its interim results for the six months ended 30 September 2025 ("Interim 2026")."

I am unsure what they have to be pleased about. These results are pretty uninspiring.