Is the negativity justified??, page-253

First 253 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Yarali

64 Posts.

16/02/16

15:32

Post #: 17033127
Share

Originally posted by jordantravispyne ↑

You were on the correct track until this statement. You are intelligent enough to understand the dots so I will do it again.

Forget who owns what in this big web. It is all about what they control.

The Investment Manager controlled the development of the patent. They timed it perfectly to be approved just before the performance fee calculation.

The BFC board (the same people who control and are directly remunerated through the Investment Manager, and thus also control the development of the patent) released this information to the market as 'price sensitive' just as the VWAP calculation begun on 23rd Dec.

The institutions tried to fight against it (big volume trades, changes in substantial holdings) but they couldn't mitigate the damage and the share price rose by 20%.

This triggered a performance fee of approximately $14M which goes to the Investment Manager (the exact party that catalysed the dramatic rise so they could get paid). Approximately 8% of the farms that were bought with the prospectus money are now to be paid for only delivering $1.3M on latest guidance which was in November.

You don't need to be scared of the boogeyman under the bed if you believe he doesn't exist.

This is for those who have an open mind.

Expand

If approx $14m in performance fee has already been paid - what is your current concern?

BFC Price at posting: 47.0¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply

Top Stories

WMG

Western Mines identifies 2 high-grade zones at Mulga Tank in WA

ALR

Altair Minerals hits high-grade copper and gold at Wee MacGregor, QLD

SNG

Siren Gold boosts antimony resource by 66% to 14.5Kt at Auld Creek, NZ

PTR

Petratherm adds $1.6 to the piggybank ahead of SA titanium drilling program

WR1

Winsome scoping study proposes low-cost operation for Adina lithium project