Motif Bio Share Discussion Threads

[scottdavid70] 29/10/2020 09:49

I know it’s not what people want to hear but many of us are going to vote down any reward of shares or BONUS that make their way towards Lumsden in particular but we have got to the point we would rather lose our money than see these Directors gain from the misery we have endured by listening to the mendacious propaganda these past 5 years.

[scottdavid70] 29/10/2020 09:46

So why the need to ask shareholders to disapply the pre-emption rights?

My honest opinion is that the Directors haven taken no risks with their own capital want in on the RTO. They want a slice of the pie that their shambolic handling of Iclaprim has presented, through sheer chance, because of Covid. A once in a generational occurrence we hope.

They are now trying to figure out a way how to stuff their pockets with MORE free shares. They didn’t get the vote through so they are now trying to go done the fear mongering route by bringing Bobby back saying that it’s SIGNIFICANT DILUTION or delisting. However, if they were acting in the best interests of the company would that be the only two alternatives?

No, I believe a simple RTO would suffice and as they didn’t purchase any shares with their own money (surprising when Lumsden was touting a share price of £1 when it was 30p, why wouldn’t he buy if he believed that? He is the greediest CEO I know) they want to reward themselves erroneously in my opinion with free shares and are working out how to sell the current shareholders the whole need for SIGNIFICANT DILUTION to allow them to do that.

They could also do the RTO and buy in afterwards but that would expose them to risk like we have had to endure and they don’t seem particularly keen to do that do they?

[scottdavid70] 29/10/2020 08:08

So why employ Peel Hunt for 5 months when cash is at an absolute premium to keep? Surely the Directors here have enough business acumen to whittle the 30 companies down to a more select number and then bring in Peel Hunt for the finishing touches? Just another example of jumping on the greedy train that we have all had to endure here.

[scottdavid70] 29/10/2020 07:47

Chuffer and I can say No that’s not good enough to a deal you don’t need Peel Hunt to do that. Even these Directors could surely see what isn’t any good!!!

[scottdavid70] 29/10/2020 07:46

So if the offers were good enough to entertain and good to enough to employ Peel Hunt why haven’t they been finalised already? A RTO simply doesn’t take that long?

[scottdavid70] 29/10/2020 07:44

So we have to assume that when Scavenger Hunt where employed to snaffle up more of our hard earned cash for about the 200th time there were deals on the table that were value enhancing for long term suffering investors. Otherwise why would you waste money on them unless they are your mates and you are just doing them a favour?

[scottdavid70] 28/10/2020 09:50

Be rigorous in every aspect of how you examine their words. Treat them with the cynicism they deserve

[scottdavid70] 28/10/2020 09:49

Remember always this was a company right at the start who se up a pay structure that gave 2/3rds of the CEO’s salary based on fundraising. The quicker therefore the money ran out huge salaries etc) the more he would have to fundraise. How about getting paid for the telling the investors the whole picture like having 2 liver specialists on hand in case the FDA had further questions before the NDA was approved? So we knew the whole picture of what we were investing in.

[scottdavid70] 28/10/2020 08:53

That’s why Bobby popped up to try to make you feel that massive dilution was better than delist. It’s all fear and fake news.

Stay together and just like voting down the dis-application of pre-emption rights we can force this come to do the right thing by us

[scottdavid70] 28/10/2020 08:51

Let’s be honest everything they have said has been done to scare investors. The rhetoric is always may not be able to complete, not enough time but they have had 30 companies and it takes 4 weeks for a RTO. That’s why it’s called the poor mans IPO.

Don’t be bullied and don’t believe a word this company says. Fight everything with cynicism. They have treated shareholders with contempt and total arrogance to your integrity and intellect. Something they are are very short on themselves

[scottdavid70] 28/10/2020 07:45

Ask the company today if you care about your investment what this means:

“ More than 30 opportunities have been carefully reviewed by the Board and discussions have progressed to the term sheet stage with several companies”

Are they still progressing or have they stopped at term sheet stage?

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 23:27

Scrolling back through the past few days messages on LSE I see the copy and paste from Robbie got deleted as it was a response from Walbrook. Delighted to say I took a screenshot to show they are selectively choosing who to reply too. They don’t like it would appear to answer some of my friends emails...quite a lot of my friends it seems but more evidence to add to the final chapter on how shareholders have been treated here from an investors point of view

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 21:56

Are they STILL PROGRESSING those term sheets or have they stopped which is why they are still actively searching for RTO’s?

Needs clarification immediately from
motif

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 21:50

One other thing I would suggest as investors here feeling the pain is to do as I have today and asked what EXACTLY “have progressed” means when it comes to term sheets. I think it’s an answer that needs clarification

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 16:48

So markets falling therefore valuations for IPO’s will be lower, Covid cases sadly rising and the new AMR Fund is on the hunt for new antibiotics. Looks like a perfect storm for Motif....

Don’t hold your breath although there literally couldn’t be a better time to do a RTO in the healthcare sector with accompanying tax losses

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 16:03

I see on LSE another investor whose hard earned money after tax has been catastrophically decimated by Lumsdens hopeless years at the tiller of the good ship Motif has been blocked on LinkedIn.

The man loved to preen on Proactive but once the liver issues came out and the bluff and bluster of ‘no clinical trials’ coupled with snaffling as much salary as he could for almost total failure he has run into the ether of the social media world and turned it into a vacuum of sychophants who tell him his career at the helm wasn’t a total bust.

Sorry Greedy Graham it has been so far and it’s time to tell the world about the Motif story

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 11:16

Like I have said consistently, if they are acting in your best interests and anyone who has shares in Motif has DEFINITELY BOUGHT MORE SAHRES THAN ANYONE ON THE BOD (remember how little faith they even have had over the years by just getting GIVEN NOT BUYING shares) then they can explain EASILY their recent actions, salaries, dis-application of Pre-emption rights and the simply grotesque potential BONUS. Not to mention the potential SIGNIFICANT DILUTION they want to say is possibly needed after having said they were FULLY FUNDED.

If these are in your best interests then they can explain them.

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 10:51

Don’t be fooled ever

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 10:51

If any of you are in any doubt would a company who has seen its share price decimated and say it’s installing strict cost controls then spend $332.000 on Director’s salaries etc as we say in the Interims?

Simply answer is No. They themselves could have deferred salary payments till they got a deal done. They haven’t done one thing that has benefited the shareholders in 18 months. We have lost access to our money but they keep filling up their bank accounts.

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 07:35

Let’s see if the company is ACTING in our best interests.

Do you believe that paying Lumsden a bonus given what he has done and achieved here and to try to dis-apply the pre-emption without talking to us is in our best interests? If no, vote against any further dilution when it’s possible announced

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 07:31

Finally, there will be a General Meeting called to vote through any changes. Anyone who doesn’t know but if you hold your shares in nominee account make sure you call Barclays, Lloyds etc and tell them how you want to vote on the proxy form or it won’t count. We can win this battle

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 07:27

Do not believe it or accept it.

We should all be offered first right of refusal in any capital raising to allow us to keep our holdings at the same percentage. Negating further dilution. That’s why we voted down to allow the company to Dis-apply pre-emption rights. Do not allow any other outcome in a May further raise. Protect your holdings

[scottdavid70] 27/10/2020 07:25

Remember Bobby is back on LSE, a person with no holdings to change the narrative and distort the investment picture for investors.

He wants you to believe that it’s doomsday and that the great Armageddon is going to happen. Delisting in January. So anything else is better than that I.e SIGNIFICANT DILUTION is a acceptable alternative to the worst case scenario. I am here to tell that is unpalatable and not acceptable.

We were told that there was no need for any further dilution and were fully funded in May right through to the end of January 2021. They believe if he scares you enough you will accept extra dilution as it feels more palatable than the other alternative which is delisting