Member Info for tbow112

Try this - document #1'

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66579590/northwest-biotherapeutics-inc-v-canaccord-genuity-llc/

"Given the RNS today it would be good to clarify your point TBow."

As an example there is a fairly detailed accusation here

"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.590344/gov.uscourts.nysd.590344.1.0_3.pdf"

Perhaps it should be pointed out that some brokers do not have a particularly good reputation.

"What happens 10:48 ?"

20000/25000 sells kick in. Reaction possibly depends on who is selling.

"A complete farce and Cedric should get his jacket and go as soon as possible."

Perhaps you would care to suggest how the company should raise capital ?

" What happens ........."

They can always raise cash from existing shareholders.

" I think they will keep at it until they run it dry if we allow them."

You may be right but being quoted will make no difference at all.

And just to add that IP is worth nothing if it is not worth enforcing.

"These shysters/charlatans are trying to 'steal' your company and 'bleed' it dry out of the spotlight. Having the company unlisted is not in your interests! "

Total nonsense. In the modern world a stock market quotation provides negligible protection from shysters.

It will be the same as any other private company - the directors propose things and the shareholders vote. Given that Nanoco does not have any dominant shareholders the result is unlikely to be very different from if they were a public company.

Sharedealing will probably be dependent on whether anyone is interested in buying the shares.

Complete waste of time.

Https://www.theguardian.com/science/2026/may/30/trial-of-multi-cancer-blood-test-among-142000-nhs-patients-fails-to-meet-main-aim

It is very difficult to understand what that last paragraph means in practice. Why should public company status be a problem in IP negotiations ?

My experience is that delisting is not necessarily a disaster so I will happily vote in favour. It is not as if retail investors have significant control over a listed company.

"The negative reaction to a share price is normally due to a combination of the company struggling financially, with no clear plan to profitability or little in the way of ‘real assets’"

Here I disagree. The negative reaction often has nothing to do with the company involved - see, for example, the link in my earlier post.

"If REE had done a similar type KEN placing at say 3.5 to 4p, do you think the SP would be where we are now?"

We have no idea where the share price might be following such a placing - there are plenty of examples of share prices dropping significantly after a premium placing.

The real problem is the widespread acceptance of placings despite the fact that they are contrary to the interests of smaller shareholders, and it is placings that create the incentive to sell/short the relevant shares whenever there is news of a potential capital raise. Given that most placings are at a discount, news of a potential capital raise automatically creates an incentive for potential placees to attempt to reduce the relevant share price by selling or shorting, and this is exacerbated when other people believe that this is likely to happen.

If this regular decimation of the share price is to be avoided, smaller shareholders need to object vociferously to placings and need to insist that pre-emption rights should be respected unless they are disapplied for a very specific reason.

"Criminally undervalued, but self inflicted."

Perhaps you would care to explain the self-inflicted part of this statement.

"Honestly think the company has a lot to offer going forwards but they need to sort this funding mechanism out ......................"

This is not something that a company can sort out. It needs the FCA and the LSE to put some effort in and understand clearly what happens when a capital raise is announced and then consider appropriate measures.

Look at this discussion from the other side of the globe - exactly the same problem.

https://forum.rareearthexchanges.com/threads/aru-fid-achieved.5210/?utm_source=Rare+Earth+Exchanges&utm_campaign=743403af51-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2026_05_26_06_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_50a3b684e9-743403af51-641060772&mc_cid=743403af51&mc_eid=218a4fb82a

"Zeus need to be removed, in my opinion."

I cannot see that Zeus have done anything wrong other than that the news clearly leaked from somebody.

If the share price decline is a consequence of the proposed capital raise then that suggest that the shares are being shorted/sold by people who expect to take part in the capital raise, or at least some people believe that that is what has happened. The remedy is for the company to make clear that any capital raise below 4p will only be made available to existing shareholders.

Https://rareearthexchanges.com/news/posco-bets-on-reelement-and-america-in-strategic-push-against-chinas-rare-earth-dominance/?utm_source=Rare+Earth+Exchanges&utm_campaign=8a274aecf9-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2026_05_22_06_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_50a3b684e9-8a274aecf9-641060772&mc_cid=8a274aecf9&mc_eid=218a4fb82a