Following our recent revelations about the Hybrid Air share value crash, we have further evidence that the company has been grossly abusing its trusting Crowdcube investors.
As if it wasnt bad enough to see the value of your holding in this company more than halved in a couple of months, the fact that the company tried to sell existing shareholders shares at the £1.40 level in late 2016, illustrates their sympathies with the Crowd.
We may never know when Hybrid discovered that £1.40 per share was considered laughable by larger investors - £1.40 being the price over 1400 Crowdcube punters forked out earlier in 2016. Earlier more Crowdcube investors forked out £1 per share in the first round.
But correspondence we have seen from the company to existing (mainly CC) shareholders attempting to elicit more support following the crash landing of the balloon's second flight, needs to be read to be believed.
On the one had it implores further support at the £1.40 level whilst never mentioning what must have been apparent by late September 2016, that £1.40 was not going to induce larger investors to come on board.
At Companies House the Crowdcube deal is listed but shortly afterwards another deal is done at a share price of £1.19 for a small consideration of just over £30k. Why the difference?
If you need further evidence of this just look at where the final share price for this round ended up (for 'international 'investors) by December 2016 - £0.575 - well below half what they were asking just a few months earlier.
There has been much talk of the balance (or lack of it) between ordinary punters presented with Crowdcube style plans and projections and the often (but not always) more savvy Corporate, VC and Angel investors.
Whilst you cant blame Crowdcube directly for this instance of blatant abuse, as they were not involved in this final funding, it still begs the question.
The company need to raise another £30m this year according to plans. No clues yet as to the likely new share price! Answers on a postcard.
On the one had it implores further support at the £1.40 level whilst never mentioning what must have been apparent by late September 2016, that £1.40 was not going to induce larger investors to come on board.
At Companies House the Crowdcube deal is listed but shortly afterwards another deal is done at a share price of £1.19 for a small consideration of just over £30k. Why the difference?
If you need further evidence of this just look at where the final share price for this round ended up (for 'international 'investors) by December 2016 - £0.575 - well below half what they were asking just a few months earlier.
There has been much talk of the balance (or lack of it) between ordinary punters presented with Crowdcube style plans and projections and the often (but not always) more savvy Corporate, VC and Angel investors.
Whilst you cant blame Crowdcube directly for this instance of blatant abuse, as they were not involved in this final funding, it still begs the question.
The company need to raise another £30m this year according to plans. No clues yet as to the likely new share price! Answers on a postcard.
There's an article in City AM this morning, saying they want to float on AIM end 17/ early 18 and raise £50m in the wake of it... good luck
ReplyDelete