Skinbiotherapeutics Share Discussion Threads

[atlantic57] 22/9/2020 18:17

Asterisk thank you

[asterix96] 22/9/2020 15:03

Soh is short for "Stephen O'Hara" (Stephen Patrick O'Hara) CEO of Opitbiotix Health PLC

[atlantic57] 22/9/2020 13:25

Is Soh Stuart ashman or someone else ?

[dire cons] 22/9/2020 12:50

Skin microbiome write up in Good Health section of Daily Mail today. Dr Cath is quoted amongst others.
Catherine O’Neill, a professor of translational dermatology at the University of Manchester, says while we know some bugs on our skin produce chemicals that are poisonous to disease-causing bacteria, we don’t know a lot about whether the skin microbiome strengthens skin or how it interacts with the immune system.

‘There’s a lot of hogwash in the field,’ she says. ‘I’ve not seen hard evidence to suggest we should all be worrying about.

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-8755993/amp/Is-soap-BACTERIA-secret-healthy-skin.html

[elrico] 22/9/2020 11:05

Nik, be consistent with the premise of your argument. You claim not to listen to the podcasts, yet make the assumption SOH is not challenged. Odd because the most recent podcasts were made up of PI questions and topics were submitted to me. So you either stopped listening some months ago or were not paying attention. Or perhaps you think you can do better. Please feel free, and do share as I do.

I must bring this cosy exchange to a natural end. Good bye.

[nik7907] 22/9/2020 08:52

Elrico

Too cosy . I meant not challenging to SOH, and I said I don't listen to the podcasts anymore I believe. Assume whatever you like. End of it for me. Sorry for ot again

[elrico] 21/9/2020 17:32

Nik, perhaps you are so used to implying bloggers are too cosy with the BOD, and this after suggesting you don't read the blog or listen to the podcasts. I take enough BS off people without your cosy comment. I assumed you wouldn't miss the guild service either.

Hope that clarifies the issue for you.

[nik7907] 21/9/2020 07:54

Sorry OT but have been kicked from opti board. Two posts. First giving an alternative view to someone admonishing us for not donating to Elrico, plus asking a question about rns's appearing not to agree with what is actually happening.

Second responding to an answer to the first saying that I do not listen to the podcasts anymore.

Then kicked.

So if I was able to I would vote down 6635.

Again sorry for OT. Won't happen again

[elrico] 20/9/2020 20:56

Gary, FYI I never you the vote down. If I do not agree I offer an opinion and hope this stimulates discussion on both sides. Some people are just lazy. :)

[elrico] 20/9/2020 20:52

Personal request from me.
Can we please stop using my friend PJ1 as the fall-guy for our collective frustrations! I know he can be repetitive with his rather awkward POV. He does try to stimulate open discussion on both bear v bull opinions. This may not come across very well in his posts. However, I have come to know him very well and understand his motives. He is invested and so are family members. Most of you will not be aware he has suffered at the hands of PLC BODs recently which has led to him being more sceptical and less trusting of BOD's of late. He has faith in the company's longevity but like some of us argues the BOD should adopt other strategies in certain area's of the business. He does not claim to be right, he offers opinions but too many focus on the negatives and do not engage, which leads to the wrong conclusion of his motives.

An example of this can be seen on here regarding BOD incentives. His POV on BOD incentives are "general" but have been interpreted as critical of SBTX. PJ1 is invested in SBTX and like me seems excited for the future potential for the company.

We are not all so eloquent. I know I am not, which can lead to context, syntax, typo's and grammar inferring something different at times.

[gary hindsight] 20/9/2020 20:29

Ok tick down obviously from an mp on this board who thinks their allowances are fully justified. :-)

[pj 1] 20/9/2020 16:54

Gary Hindsight19 Sep '20 - 21:46 - 6628 of 6630
0 2 0
Pj re your 6614
Have to laugh when you say the excesses are being questioned In the House of Commons as being obscene. Are you serious?
Presumably you forgot about the mp who claimed £20k for a book cabinet for his library as essential for his work when he was retiring in a few months
The guy who had his moat dredged at taxpayers expense
The mep’s employing their wives, sons and daughters to claim their salaries and expenses
Plus a few hundred other examples

Whilst I may agree with you on executive greed but to hold up the mp’s as the ones questioning this ethic is quite preposterous
=================================================================================

F.A.O Gary Hindsight.

Preposterous? see below ''and represent your interests to government.''



WHAT WE DO
FOR SHAREHOLDERS
SUPPORTING THE INDIVIDUAL SHAREHOLDER
ShareSoc is a not-for-profit membership organisation, created by and for individual investors. Our aims are to help improve your investment experience and to represent your interests wherever this is needed.

To do this, we offer a range of educational and informational services, and represent your interests to government. We also offer assistance to shareholders when companies they invest in misbehave and do not act in shareholders’ best interests. It is only by joining together that we can campaign effectively on such matters. We want to ensure that shareholders have their proper say as owners of the businesses in which they invest.

REMUNERATION – Why And How Directors’ Pay Should Be Improved
Directors’ pay is too high in many cases and needs to be reduced. High pay is looking increasingly like it is politically unacceptable and this may lead to a backlash of business regulation that will be detrimental to investors.
This campaign is aimed at improving the quality of remuneration arrangements of the companies listed on the Main London stock market, and the AIM market managed by the London Stock Exchange, so that:

i. investors are less likely to lose money as a result of investing in companies that pay their executives too much or for the wrong things.

ii. investors are more likely to receive better returns as a result of better alignment of executives’rewards with those of long term shareholders and incentives that focus on long term performance.

UPDATE 13 June 2018
Remuneration continues to be a key issue for investors and the ShareSoc Remuneration Guidelines, published in June 2106, are proving to be helpful. We now need to ensure they receive a wider audience. We are planning a campaign to send them out to companies, Chairmen, CEOs, FDs and NEDs, NOMADs, corporate brokers, financial advisers and fund managers.

We encourage members to send copies of our guidelines to companies where they are unhappy with the current remuneration arrangements.

We have now split the guidelines into separate documents which focus on only smaller companies (<£200m market cap) and larger companies. Click below to download the guidelines:

Smaller Companies Remuneration Guidelines (14 pages)

Larger Companies Remuneration Guidelines (12 pages)

Why And How Directors’ Pay Should Be Improved
Directors’ pay is too high in many cases and needs to be reduced. High pay is looking increasingly like it is politically unacceptable and this may lead to a backlash of business regulation that will be detrimental to investors. ShareSoc Directors Cliff Weight and David Stredder discussed Remuneration in this video, which gives useful background on the issues and is still topical today

This campaign was launched with the publication of ShareSoc’s Remuneration Guidelines and a Press Release in May 2016, which received wide media coverage.

To see the ShareSoc Remuneration Guidelines go to Remuneration-Guidelines. Key opinion formers have given their support to the ShareSoc Remuneration Guidelines.

Remuneration Forum

We have set up a Forum for ShareSoc Full Members where you can add comments on remuneration issues: . There are comments on many companies in the Forum which also contains copies of Manifest’s Corporate Governance reports on a number of large companies with contentious arrangements.

Press Releases

We have also issued a series of press releases on companies where pay is excessive. These have been widely reported in the press. In 2016, we have issued 7 press releases so far (Anglo American, Berkeley Holdings, BP, Persimmon, Reckitt Benckiser, RELX and WPP). You can view our press releases here. Use the search box above to search for comment on specific companies.

Company Issues

These are some of the companies we have covered in this campaign during 2016:

Anglo American: Company has shrunk by 80/90% but no reduction in remuneration. LTIP award is same % of salary and offers windfall opportunity – it should have been reduced in size.

Berkeley Holdings: Unnecessary and excessive pay. Excessive dilution. Awards granted at low point in business cycle.

BP: High pay (£14m), the combination of high pay and 20% increase when making £5.5Bn loss, high pension, bonus is pensionable, balanced scorecard targets are too easy and don’t reflect the shareholder experience.

Persimmon: Unnecessary and excessive pay. Excessive dilution. Awards granted at low point in business cycle.

Reckitt Benckiser: High pay (£23m), soft targets, huge LTIP and option awards even though no need for additional incentives.

RELX: Pay of the CEO (£11 million in 2015 and £50 million since he became CEO) too high, excessively complex (5 incentive schemes and 1/30th defined benefit pension scheme), and incentive targets are too easy.

WPP: Unnecessarily high pay (£70 million this year).

We plan to continue with similar numbers of press releases in future.

Attendance at and asking questions about remuneration at AGMs

One of the best ways to hold Boards of Directors to account is to attend their AGM and ask questions. We have increased our visibility at AGMs this year in this respect. And we have fired a warning shot to Companies and their Remuneration Committees that we will question excessive and unnecessary remuneration. We plan to continue to do this in 2018 and urge all ShareSoc members to participate in this campaign.

In 2018, so far, we have attended and asked questions at the AGMs of:

RTC Group
Aviva
Unilever
Reckitt Benckiser
Prudential
RBS
To Support the Campaign

Note that many of the things we would like to see so that shareholders had more control over pay are promoted in our Shareholder Rights campaign. Click on this link for more information.

If you wish to make a voluntary contribution to support the costs of running this campaign please go to this page of our web site: Donations. Alternatively we do recommend a paid subscription to ShareSoc which gives you many other benefits.

You can use the Contact form on this web site to request that you be added to our contact list for the Remuneration Campaign, or if you have any questions on the Remuneration Campaign. Likewise if you wish to contact the Campaign Manager, who is currently Cliff Weight, please use that contact form.

[gary hindsight] 19/9/2020 21:46

Pj re your 6614Have to laugh when you say the excesses are being questioned In the House of Commons as being obscene. Are you serious?Presumably you forgot about the mp who claimed £20k for a book cabinet for his library as essential for his work when he was retiring in a few monthsThe guy who had his moat dredged at taxpayers expense The mep's employing their wives, sons and daughters to claim their salaries and expensesPlus a few hundred other examples Whilst I may agree with you on executive greed but to hold up the mp's as the ones questioning this ethic is quite preposterous

[aquaesulis01] 19/9/2020 10:42

These options are an annual thing then and appear to get progressively more generous noting the price of the options in 18th April 2019 RNS were 18p?

"Stuart Ashman does not hold any ordinary shares in the Company. On 18 April 2019 Mr Ashman was granted options over 3,892,083 ordinary shares, representing 3% of the current issued share capital of the Company. The options, which have a life of ten years, are exercisable in three equal tranches at a price of 18p per share. The first two tranches can be exercised no earlier than 24 months from the date of grant, and the third tranche no earlier than 36 months from the date of grant. Exercise is subject to achieving performance milestones set by the Company's board which are aligned to growth in shareholder value and commercialisation of the Company's SkinBiotix® technology."

[madaboutmed] 18/9/2020 23:41

And they have to wait 24 months to exercise the options which have performance criteria attached to them.

[blah blah] 18/9/2020 22:37

Let’s get a bit of perspective. 1.8m options between them at 9p means they are currently 10p in the money, which is a pre tex profit of £180k, and just over £90k between them after tax. So we are talking about less than £50k each after tax. Not much in the grand scheme of things is it?

[slartybartfaster] 18/9/2020 22:04

Have you?Don't bother i know the answer.

[lovewinshatelosses] 18/9/2020 21:19

Now, now PJ. Everyone invested here will be familiar with what remuneration committees are. I agree with you broadly - it's a racket, especially in the big corporates - but why the questions here, and why now? If the BOD stuff up, I will probably be the first to shout about it - but so far, so good IMO.