The engines have fired up at last for MDX. ( BPRG ) At long last they are being recognised for the force they will become over the next two years. On the cusp of disclosing huge revenue-earning deals with Global pharmacists. These have been hinted at as being unrolled before the years end, but may be in the next days.You still have time to get in at a bargain-basement price before the SP takes off for real shortly.

Sounds like a "best 19" to me. ;-))))))))

It's always a case of "Oh, I'll be right eventually" with you isn't it, Tabatha? Until that highly improbably moment it would seem the bears are right, right, right, right, right and right again.

Take that back to you "ring" with my best wishes. ;-)))))

Got any more room in that ring? There's probably a pretty large pineapple blocking access. ROFLMAO!

Trig.do you get a new broom and a 10 every time you use the phrase move on???
Ive told you... Barry dont come second.and believe me he is on our sidekeep it realdont drop to the depths of bouncy

I doubt he'll come second to you pathetic PIs, ;-))))))))

How is the fishing?...is it windy on the rig?....

Fishing on this thread is an abolute doddle, my little snapper. LOL!

What's your average price tabby ... 28p ?


I think we can pass judgement now.

B J Muncaster - 25 Jul'09 - 06:31 - 10847 of 11939


sunsetwarrior,

It is illegal to offer securities in the US without filing a registration document with the SEC. We couldn't afford the cost of doing so.



Anyone know that cost of this?

Brilliant!


orvil - 25 Jul'09 - 10:01 - 10922 of 11946


There are too many people on this board with the best intentions, but no real ability to bring off what they are espousing. The deal as outlined originally has failed-end of. The revised deal at 2p has not failed and an attempt is being made to lower the rate of entry.If you shareholders who think you know best were all put in a room together I guarantee there would be no consensus. In stead of trying to appease every shareholder, which is an impossibility, try putting some money in to save the company. The dilution at 2p for those who subscribe is virtually no worse than at 10p, only those who do not subscribe will feel the full force of the dilution, but at least they will have a company, that can succeed, whereas if the money is not raised they won't. There is no agreement on the loan proposal, and it would fail as miserably as the 10p offer through lack of support. Stop pontificating as if you know best and get your cheque books out. At the hourly rate of a road sweeper most of you regulars could have spent the time on this board earning enough money to pay for an scln.

Interesting


B J Muncaster - 25 Jul'09 - 10:55 - 10960 of 11947


Shaden,

I understand your points. The reality is, that regardless of what we were told in the past, none of the core-techs are at a saleable stage; they all require funds and management to bring to a saleable proposition. We've proritised the ones we think are lowest risk, lowest fudning requirement and fastest to establishing value. I thought we'd made this prefectly clear in both our presentation and in the Chairman's letter.

The question facing shareholders who do have the financial ability to support us is "do we have the right people to do the job"? That's for shareholders to decide. I think we do, but I would, wouldn't I?

Dilyou are miles awaybut stop digging.remember they dipped under the suspended price.Kapeesh

Big Al - 27 Jul 2009 09:43 - 7603 of 7619
Well, it would appear the thickest person on the BBs called this one spot on over several years and you were not as lucky as you profess to be, and I can't see anyne around here putting the word "shrewd" in the same sentence as "tabasco".

shrewd? no. Screwed? Certainly.

B J Muncaster - 25 Jul'09 - 19:48 - 11313 of 11962


crawford,

We can look at limiting it to, say, 9M. We really do need more than 6M if we're to forge ahead on all fronts.

GausieI see mummy has given you your pocket money todayare you going to short M&S with it again? Now that was shrewd!I cant see anyone around here putting the word "mummy" in a sentence without Gausie

Good answer tabby.

Gausie lives with mummy
Big Al works on a bouncy castle
Barry is an honest man who puts shareholders first and never comes second
Tabby is always right
Tabby is a thick, noisy, opinionated and illiterate twat who blew his life savings on an investment that every serious trader knew was doomed.

Only one of these statements is true - use your skill and judgement to work it out.

Gausie lives with mummy

LOL Gausie ..................... also spot on.

The following is useful advice, Tabatha:



EdmondJ - 26 Jul'09 - 10:55 - 11514 of 11970


The extent of dilution at 2p does however create a firm incentive, in terms of managing a portfolio, for long-termers with an average price say 30p or higher (possibly even 20p) to write the situation off - sell out, book a tax loss and start from scratch (if they judge Meldex so merits). This may not help the short-term after-market if the company relists!

Here is where you made the mistake on the other statements.Gausie
Big Al works on a oil rig
Barry is as honest as most business men who is putting shareholders first in this instance and never comes second
Tabby is 99% right
Tabby is hot and spicy funnya lucky thicko who invested some of his life savings in a company that he made a considerable profit on previouslyand is confident of a good future under Barry/Garry.

Tabby - we all know you well enough to understand that a winner at goodwood will make your day; but, Tabby, your peculiar obsession with regularly ramming a good sized pineapple up your bum - that will make your hole weak.

This lot seems a pretty good precis of the mess. Jeez, we've now got someone gathering funds from those who couldn't make the 2500 in the first place. You've got to be certifiable in the zoo.

"Tabby is hot and spicy funnya lucky thicko who invested some of his life savings in a company that he made a considerable profit on previously" - far too many lies in that one, but you do make me laugh. ;-)


orvil - 27 Jul'09 - 09:45 - 11869 of 11982


Well I have had a rest from posting for over 24hrs and having read all of the recent posts(including the rubbish ones) I will have my final say on the sln. The applications for an sln at 10p failed. BM and GC rightly canvassed investors and concluded that the only way for the money to be raised was by an sln that would be accepted at a 2p conversion by the shareholders. Due to the fact that some shareholders could not raise enough money for a 2.5k sln an alternative campaign by Geordie has been activated to try and incorporate in the process smaller sums of money (min 500) to reduce the dilution to a max of 10p, which will effectively reduce the potential dilution of those who cannot or will not raise futher funds.
My own view is that this approach however laudable is fundamentally flawed. Investors have already rejected the 10p conversion option, and one must assume that the majority of shares are held by those who have the ability to raise money if they so desired. These majority shareholders will now only apply for sln's on the basis that they (and a vote at a shareholders meeting is by no of shares not individuals)will vote in a sln that will be converted at 2p. The money 6m for starters, in my opoinion, will be raised for this scenario to the full amount. This will leave any money raised by the Geordie route as wasted , because he has made it clear that this money is only to be used for a 10p conversion option, which if my assessment is right will be voted down by the majority. What it effectively does is divide the shareholders and waste valuable management time in seeking a lower total funding option. The better option for smaller funders is to form groups as has been suggested and move forward with the Boards proposal.
I firmly believe that the company under the new management will turn the company round and create value for all shareholders, even those that are diluted . I cannot accept that the company should be put at risk, by the actions of a group of shareholders that are prepared to invested the smallest amount at the last moment in the companies survival bid. However you read that last statement, I have every sympathy for genuine small shareholders but the Aim market and companies like MDX were not for widows and orphans and gamblers. I cannot see how putting the company in further uncertainty and the prospect of massive dilution if the sln fails again is in the interest of small shareholders who genuinely cannot raise 2.5k. I think you will find that Geordie in his action,will be saving more of those investors who are not prepared to fund the company, but could afford to, than the genuine cases. I am not prepared to accept , therefore, that the action of raising 1.5m to secure the possibility of a 10p conversion is in the interest of the company or indeed any investors in the long term.

the_doctor - 27 Jul'09 - 09:48 - 11870 of 11982



"the reduction in SLN conversion price subject to shareholder approval from 10p to 2p is really just not palatable in my books"

Fatboy (Andy)

But do you really think the remaining 4.5m would have been raised in 13 working days if the price was reduced to say, 5p???

This is why IMO they needed more time.

I'm now concerned there wont even be time to fill this 2p SLN unless largel players come in heavily!!

grahamite2 - 27 Jul'09 - 09:50 - 11871 of 11982


Fatboy9, the driving force behind this change is:

Target: 6,000,000
Raised: 1,455,000

It could not possibly be simpler or starker.

This is not just falling short a few pennies - it is a colossal flop. Obviously very dramatic action is needed. Geordie has come up with a scheme and good luck to him, but I suspect many of those who can't afford 2,500, can't afford anything. We need heavy hitters and if they demand a high premium for the very high risk they'd be taking, so be it.

Geordie0 has given up on his plan.