Short and sweet
@mignani..... haha!
Here's my long version adding to yours and
@norvest post but really nothing new except some possible reasoning that doesn't change the matter at hand now anyway without that announcement we are all hanging on.
In Trent We Trust.... so here's our options as I see it from the nearing need for
more capital, market indications and
recent MST report.
1. Accumulation from an industry player with intent to provide capital through a con note. (Simple version for the short term) This would put a rocket under the share price!
2. Accumulation from an industry player with intent to provide capital through a con note, have agreement to buy a portion of sub-holders shares at an agreed value whilst also having an agreement from management to continue to build out the platform
(milestones) to facilitate the
full CDR capabilities where the
most value from this whole
WRK PLATFORM technology will be sourced.
WAREHOUSED EMPLOYEES WEEKLY PAYROLL DATA AND ID ---> CONSENT TO USE EMPLOYEES DATA ---> EMPLOYEES DATA SENT TO SERVICE PROVIDERS ---> SERVICE PROVIDERS BUILD OUT SERVICES AND/OR PRODUCTS BASED ON EMPLOYEES DATA AT VALUE.
I believe sizeable data and/or broker fees can be charged across millions of employees annually!
Quite simply, this is why a larger industry player would want the
WRK PLATFORM!
This allows a
suitor to gain access at an early stage to the
technology needed placing
many millions of employees almost instantly on the
WRK PLATFORM and in
reach of product and
service providers, along with having all the other features the
WRK PLATFORM offers.
These two scenarios above may provide the most value for share holders. It would all come down to timing. I believe it would need to happen soon to flow smoothly due to government regulation deadlines creeping up and of course the need for capital on the
WRK front. If either of these two scenarios were possible we must be nearing crunch time as also, whoever is accumulating may be nearing the disclosure stage!
3. A "simple" capital raise. Trent stated this was not needed! This scenario should have already been dealt with,
you would have thought, at higher levels and not waiting for lows and also begs the other question, why would there be so much accumulation on market when a raise would be imminent?
If we raised at these lows now, that would give rise to more questions that I won't go into now, but I'm sure you can guess what they are.
4. Rights Issue. Maybe, but again, we are now at lows and Trent stated a raise was not needed.
5. A placement to strategic or cornerstone. If it was a small raise, only just ok, but again done at lows!
6. Directors loans......
7. A simple contract. Hmmm...... getting tight?
Anyhow, just thinking out aloud here and only my opinion!
Feel free to throw up some more possibilities or just pull my ravings apart!
Cheers,
Jocko.
(20min delay)
