"............It's sad to see long term holders that have supported the company over many years having to sell at such a low sp............"
Totally agree with you Buckland but then that is the game we choose to play. Unfortunately the whole bio sector is taking a bit of a hiding at the moment. Personally invested in one that over the past several months has gone from single digits up to around the $0.60 mark and back to high teens. Feel disappointed for those, if any, who got in at the ATH.
Easy of course to lay all of the blame solely at the feet of the BoD, Just takes a few key strokes, but if we dig a little deeper maybe the story becomes a little more nuanced. For example lets take the 30th June closing prices 2014 - 2021 - $0.011, $.007, .083, .061, .041, .038, .155, .09 and we currently sit at $0.087.
The other one I mentioned closed 30Jun'21 at .345 and is currently .18. Yet another for Jun 30 closed at .52 and is is currently .35. On that single KPI suggest we would actually need to congratulate the BoD for comparatively protecting the price however, I would be the first to agree my example is but part of the story. Lets take a look at some of the other aspects that go to make up the whole of PAA and where it sits in the market.
PAA is currently ranked 1,612 of the 2,417 companies listed on the ASX. and 143rd of 210 in its sector. PAA has SOI of almost 317 million shares and at .087 a market cap of circa $27.5 mil so not in any way a power player. In total there are 3,314 shareholders with just 415, who hold more than 100K shares each, so an unusually tight register.
Dr Google also yields some interesting stats regards shares and investors. Apparently there are around 6.6 million Aussie retail investors. If we accept that, then just half of 1% have taken the punt with PAA. Further, a quick review of HC, tells me that since Jan this year for PAA there has been a total of 1,251 postings from a total of just 64 contributors, wiling to share their views covering various aspects of the business, both good and bad.
So we can boil all this down to, of the .05% of markets investors who have PAA shares, just under 2% of those directly contribute to the HC conversation, which tends to lead to the old query regards trees falling within the forest however ; Imagine, especially leading into a period of perhaps the most significant data the company is likely to have for some time, this 2% were to act universally as advocates of the business.
Not suggesting a bunch of up-ramping ideologues or indeed any form of censorship involved but rather, simply ruling a line under the “historic” concerns and focusing more as a collective voice on discussion relating more generally to the current events and how they are influencing the future directions of the company. I totally acknowledge the concept that past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior however, in my unicorn world there is positive and relevant information and data being formally fed to the market through a professional channel who knows how the game is played !
PS. Indecently Buckland, at 170 you do win the prize with more than twice the contributions of anyone else - congrats. Lastly with a mere 35 retorts can hardly be considered your nemesis
Lets see what happens in the next week or two !
(20min delay)