RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Until March... zwerp2000, Aarcor, the "merger" was not speculation. It took a year and more to set up. The setup was something that was actually done, no speculation about it. Midatech and Bioasis shareholders were not voting on a speculation. The legal documents are on SEDAR.
There are only two basic intellectual properties owned by Bioasis - xB3 and Cresence EGF. There are several other intellectual properties owned by Bioasis but they all have dependence on those two basic ones.
LT had been announced as engaged with Bioasis for at least six months before the Cresence deal was done. If Midatech, LT and The Placee wanted the Cresence EGF stuff and not xB3, why did they allow Bioasis to acquire it? They could have bought it straight up, leaving Bioasis sitting with the worthless xB3 platform.
But no, it had to go through Bioasis. I consider it a possibility that Bioasis started downplaying the value of xB3 for a strategic reason and they may have used Cresence for the same reason. They may have wanted to hold the value of Bioasis steady without it appearing that xB3 was the only real thing of value. They may have wanted to purposefully diminish the value of xB3. (Evans & Evans warned of potential conflicts of interests with Bioasis management and BoD. Searching for evidence of conflicts of interest is the proper thing for anybody to do.)
And that could have been a way to get 75% ownership of Biodexa into the hands of those who actually wanted xB3 without the markets understanding the real value of xB3 and that the real objective was its acquisition by those others.
Further, once in Biodexa's hands, most of the xB3 IP and the xB3 platform could then be sold off cheaply, maybe even gladly in the minds of shareholders, to help Biodexa survive without further massive dilution, and/or the exercising of those hundreds of millions of prepaid warrants.
Further still, I have suspicions about a number of other players who may have known the setup all along. Those names should be included in a submission to regulators for investigation. I won't publicly name them.
So you and others can poo-poo all this and consider it too speculative to pursue but if the speculation is true then you may be losing your interests in Bioasis due to misdirection, conflicts of interest, subterfuge and purposefully inadequate and inaccurate disclosures.
There has been just too much hocus pocus going on to conclude that xB3 has failed.
And if Lind gets all the assets, who might buy them? Anybody associated with LT? Or is there somebody else out there ready to go, somebody who has been out there waiting for a long time? I don't know, but these are things to wonder about. Was the Midatech deal actually 2nd prize? Is the acquisition of Bioasis assets by Lind the 1st prize in all of this, the real objective? Is that why I have called the Lind notes the checkmate play so many times?
Shareholders need to decide, right now, whether they want a full documenting of the goings on among Bioasis, LT and maybe even some Bioasis shareholders, and then sending that full accounting of what is known and what is speculation to the BCSC and the TSXV.
Is it worth reporting it all?
In the end, even if xB3 is worth billions, maybe the three managements of Bioasis were simply too incompetent to make a success of it. That's a possibility. But if there were plans to gain ownership of xB3, then incompetence could be just about the best thing to cover all traces of those other plans and purposes.
And Bioasis is at 4¢ because the company may not survive, and if it does, it may be without any assets. No matter how great xB3 might be, Bioasis today is priced at what it likely should be worth. Bioasis is not a good investment right now.
jd