my prediction, page-4

Why would they? Problem there is value seen as dropping below $1.00 on payment of second instalment,why would anyone pick up these instant losses. The only way out is for BCS to convince the market that the value including the two remaining instalments is above $2.00/share. They were trying to do this by unashamedly hyping the early divi, so it's much harder now given that the deliberate action of BCS in effectively cancelling the dividend and of its advisors in selling their holdings has done untold damage to the remaining shareholders.
Other than advising to never again go near a MacQ involved product I would suggest that if ever a project is floated in this way in future, the authorities must ensure that:
a) the promoters are "locked in" to their shareholdings until fundraising is complete (i.e. instalments paid up) as the co-investment by the promoters has arguably been used to give comfort to other investors in the float.
b) any statements by the company re returns should be made on the basis of the paid up price not the partly paid. Rowe's & BC's repeated trumpeting of a secure 18pc or so year one return was guaranteed to suck in small investors.

As events have shown, a cynic might suggest that the staged payment process has been used here to enable the promoters to get out with indecent haste and to distort the return to investors.

P.S. Assuming this to be a serious discussion forum, may I suggest an end to the tedious posts re transfers to third parties? To be valid, any transfer must be with the approval of the receiving person or organisition and if you somehow misrepresent that approval, you'll be up for fraud & the shares are still yours.