[ADVERT]
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Motif Bio Plc LSE:MTFB London Ordinary Share GB00BVVT4H71 ORD 0.01P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 0.50 0.40 0.55 - 0.00 00:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology 0.0 -0.5 0.0 - 3

Motif Bio Share Discussion Threads

Showing 9901 to 9921 of 9925 messages
Chat Pages: 397  396  395  394  393  392  391  390  389  388  387  386  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
03/11/2021
10:19
Bivictrix is perking up though.
small crow
03/9/2021
14:16
The parrot is dead It's not dead it's just sleepingLol
tnt99
23/8/2021
16:11
Bvx doing well l see. Just like the sham shareholders group
chuffer2
11/8/2021
16:08
Also note, Chuffer, that Government Finance Acts in the last decade or so have introduced 'loss-buying' rules intended to counter companies accessing unused corporation tax losses from unconnected parties. With such anti-avoidance rules, HMRC takes into account all relevant factors in seeking to establish the purpose of the arrangements. Why don't you think that a complete change of directors could be such a relevant factor, in flagging up the unconnected nature of an acquired company?
hedgehog 100
11/8/2021
15:17
Get stuffed Chuffer2- losing your sense of perspective! Investment is gone......
smcl
11/8/2021
15:17
Chuffer, As I've mentioned previously I'm a retail investor who is interested in shares and RTOs. Which is why I've been running the following thread on ADVFN for over seven years: "THE REVERSE TAKEOVERS & SHELLS THREAD Hedgehog 100 11 Mar '14 - 21:09" https://uk.advfn.com/cmn/fbb/thread.php3?id=31587598 I've seen numerous RTOs into shells over the years, and the tax losses never seem to be given any significant value relative to what they could potentially/theoretically save in tax. Given me one single example of biotech losses in a shell like MTFB that were sold for the sort of sum that you and Scott seem to think they're worth.
hedgehog 100
11/8/2021
15:14
For anyone defending Gold and Lumsden over the RTO explain these two things: If the deal was so good and fai for shareholders why didnt they organise a presentation for us to sell the huge advantages it held for us and explain why they were receiving warrants at a 50% better value deal than the very shareholders they got into this sit by failing to get Iclaprim approved, partnered in the 1st place to take some of the risk which Lumsden promised all the way back 2015 and justify why they paid themselves so much including a bonus for Lumsden if the RTO went ahead? If the deal was so good for shareholders why not explain it? We had total radio silence on the biggest moment of the companies existence which also goes against good Corporate governance. Also why did Walbrook not once promote the RTO publicly through any medium be it social media or otherwise if the deal was so good after the initial document came out? For a deal that is supposedly in the shareholders best interests these are strange occurrences (almost like they wanted to keep it on the low down it was even happening given the extent of warrants and shares they were personally getting) wouldn’t you say and hard to understand how they can remain as Director’s of any company with that type of communication with their shareholders over something so significant
scottdavid70
11/8/2021
14:36
Bellend is right!
smcl
11/8/2021
14:25
Who would take ant notice of your posts - MINI SD70!!
smcl
11/8/2021
14:17
I wouldn't take any notice of Hedgehogs posts. He still think you need the same bod members to realise tax losses. Lol
chuffer2
11/8/2021
13:04
No I’m not recognising that BiVictrix shouldnt have paid much for Motif Bio listing. I am recognising that that’s all they were paying for. They saved noting trying to do the RTO as the fee for the extra £2.5 is the difference for the brokers. So a shocking deal for them actually after 6 months of paying advisors etc. Noting for Iclaprim, nothing for deferred tax losses for Motif Bio shareholders. Why give so much of your company to 4 Director’s when there are so many other easier clean cash shells out there? 6 months for a RTO is extremely long as you know if it’s just for a listing so why did it take so long? The main question is though the Director’s shares they were given and at the price 50% less than shareholders. You can try to argue it but it simply comes down to that isn’t and wasn’t in our best interests. Everything else is just noise The only wonders here are the brokers and would have been the Motif Bio Director’s - even BiVictrix would have been worse off but the biggest losers were Motif Bio shareholders
scottdavid70
11/8/2021
12:12
Scott, As you have observed, BVX has raised £2.5M. less in the IPO than it would have in the RTO, so obviously it's paying less as the broker takes a percentage of the funds raised for their work. Also, a lot of the preparations done for the RTO, e.g. prospectus preparation, and finding investors, would have just been carried forward for the IPO, significantly saving time. That said, you seem to now be partly recognising that BVX shouldn't have paid much for MTFB's listing. Whereas for months, you've been complaining that it should have been paying far more for MTFB's listing, and that MTFB's directors were somehow failing in their duties for massively underpricing it. The fact is, the shell value of MTFB was only about what BVX agreed to pay for it, and the price was fair.
hedgehog 100
11/8/2021
11:38
Interesting that when you look at the cost of the fundraise and admission for the Motif Bio RTO with BiVictrix it was £1,100,000 and the cost for BiVictrix to do the same on their own was £830,000? Thought the purpose of a RTO was it was cheaper and faster? They seem to have been just fine on their own and saved themselves money. Guess it’s more expensive to have to handout all those warrants and options to Director’s because the deal itself means that Motif Bio shareholders were offered nothing for Iclaprim, deferred tax of 18 million when you look at today’s admission for BiVictrix. Remember the Director’s warrants were at 20p and shareholders at 30p with only 6 months to exercise them. So shareholders still in the red today.
scottdavid70
11/8/2021
11:10
Lol It would have to go up 3,700% for most to b/e
chuffer2
11/8/2021
09:50
No one else had started a BVX thread, so I have 'done the honours': "BiVictriX Therapeutics: Emerging Biotechnology Company" https://uk.advfn.com/cmn/fbb/thread.php3?id=48841695
hedgehog 100
11/8/2021
08:05
Chuffer2- we know we know!!
smcl
11/8/2021
07:58
Now up 37.5% @ 27.50p ..... your warrants would be starting to perk up about here, if you had them. But at least you have Iclaprim, oh that's right you actually don't have it. In the long and sordid history of AIM I am not sure if there has ever been a group of more dunderheaded investors than those who, by choice, have been left holding the bag on MTFB.
w t tutte
11/8/2021
07:36
Just to rub salt in to the wound of you geniuses Bivictrix has opened up 22.5% .... and going higher
w t tutte
10/8/2021
17:55
Ah SC70…….go home
smcl
10/8/2021
17:54
Funny they used the same first name…. Not even subtle. If the group were talking to Gold they would have called a EGM already because Gold and Lumsden are as trustworthy as Donald Trump. Amazed Biomarck, Lamellar etc with Chris Wardhaugh haven’t decided to offload their services given the tainted reputations from this absolute travesty of a RTO that was tried to be bungled through. Imagine having people on your board who when you are trying to raise money see that’s you raised $125 million and had zero value left at the end and then tried to screw investors over by asking for more money at the AGM for your salaries despite not getting Iclaprim approved and then taking as many shares for yourselves as the entire shareholding base who had suffered at your hands. How do these people stay in those jobs at those companies?
scottdavid70
10/8/2021
17:33
My brother in law looked into joining this sham shareholders group and got a reply from jon john???? Wouldn't surprise me if it was Gold himself pulling another fast one to delay matters so he can even swindle more cash from the coffers. Scum!!!!
chuffer2
Chat Pages: 397  396  395  394  393  392  391  390  389  388  387  386  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
MTFB
Motif Bio
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20211128 21:43:10