-
05-01-2016, 09:29 PM
#1811
Originally Posted by allanatnz
Hi,Jonu, I am new to NZX. don't know too much about history and/or stories in NZX. I am quite interested in the history of VML. Can please have talk here or private message me? Many thanks
Hi Allan. I suggest you have a scroll through this thread, then you will get a wider point of view than mine. I am after all a narrow minded bigot
-
06-01-2016, 09:19 AM
#1812
Member
-
06-01-2016, 09:55 AM
#1813
-
06-01-2016, 10:58 AM
#1814
Member
-
06-01-2016, 11:52 AM
#1815
Member
Originally Posted by jonu
The part you said you assumed...that the SP would hold up.
Ah yes. More so a figure of speech. But I am confident the SP will be sufficient come march - we are one announcement away from locking in the SP. I also believe VML will have a better reception on the ASX.
-
06-01-2016, 11:56 AM
#1816
Member
Originally Posted by Baa_Baa
The required market cap to transfer to NZX equates to a share price of $0.49 ... close, but not quite "met the condition" yet.
There is no talk of an ASX listing, not to say it won't ever happen, but it's not in the plan anymore as far as we have been told.
Noted. Ok a bit to go then. They'll go to the ASX for sure. I picking this year too. But yep I understand they have said it is not their intention for now.
-
06-01-2016, 02:49 PM
#1817
Date of relevant event: 23 December 2015
Date this disclosure made: 6 January 2016
Date last disclosure made: 2 November 2015
Substantial product holder(s) giving disclosure
Full name(s): Scott Bradley, Rebecca Bradley, Sharbo Limited
Summary of substantial holding
Class of quoted voting products: Ordinary shares
Summary for Scott Bradley, Rebecca Bradley, Sharbo Limited
For this disclosure,—
(a) total number held in class: 17,281,095
(b) total in class: 82,053,920
(c) total percentage held in class: 21.06%
For last disclosure,—
(a) total number held in class: 17,281,095
(b) total in class: 72,724,508
(c) total percentage held in class: 23.76%
-
06-01-2016, 05:05 PM
#1818
Originally Posted by Baa_Baa
The second condition was stated as:
"(b) VMob attains a market capitalisation of at least $40 million, by no later than 31 March 2016." https://www.nzx.com/companies/VML/announcements/270342
Depending on ones crystal ball supposition valuation, the HY announcement of $4.8m ACMR (1057% growth over same period last year) at say a 10x factor exceeds the $40m hurdle already, which may be a key driver for the current SP rise.
Though for me, the "ACMR forecast to exceed $10m in next six to nine months" clinches the deal.
Encouraging to see 22 people have already picked VML for the 2016 stock picking contest, currently ranked in the Top10 of 137 companies in the comp.
how many of the 22 have skin in the game , i wonder?
-
07-01-2016, 01:57 PM
#1819
Member
Originally Posted by Baa_Baa
The second condition was stated as:
"(b) VMob attains a market capitalisation of at least $40 million, by no later than 31 March 2016." https://www.nzx.com/companies/VML/announcements/270342
Depending on ones crystal ball supposition valuation, the HY announcement of $4.8m ACMR (1057% growth over same period last year) at say a 10x factor exceeds the $40m hurdle already, which may be a key driver for the current SP rise.
Though for me, the "ACMR forecast to exceed $10m in next six to nine months" clinches the deal.
Encouraging to see 22 people have already picked VML for the 2016 stock picking contest, currently ranked in the Top10 of 137 companies in the comp.
Suffice to say, but VML getting to the NZX looks almost certain now.
If we could get another update on ACMR growth, even if its minor.... the SP could increase quite a bit as people look to take advantage of SP increases from a main board listing.
Thoughts?
-
07-01-2016, 02:45 PM
#1820
Originally Posted by Cobber
Suffice to say, but VML getting to the NZX looks almost certain now. [snip]
Attachment 7783
"(b) VMob attains a market capitalisation of at least $40 million, by no later than 31 March 2016."
The second condition for transfer to an NZX listing has been 'attained'. I wonder whether there is fine print, like ... attained for how long, or 'sustained' for how long, or something else. On a literal interpretation though, condition (b) has been met.
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks