Sunday 21 January 2018 ShareProphets: The one stop source for breaking news, expert analysis, and podcasts on fast-moving AIM and LSE listed shares

AIM Regulation putting its foot down for once – I wonder who the company could be?

By Cynical Bear | Sunday 18 December 2016

Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from ShareProphets). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Unbelievably, it’s very rare for AIM to actually issue a disciplinary notice but one came out last Thursday. Unfortunately it was anonymous although it is still worth taking a closer look and we may as well try and have a guess if nothing else.

The AIM Disciplinary Notice is HERE and the disciplinary committee determined that an unnamed AIM company should be privately censured and fined the feeble amount of £75,000 for a breach of AIM Rule 31, which is failing to supply its Nomad with information reasonably required to carry out its Nomad responsibilities and not seeking their advice regarding compliance with AIM rules.

Before getting to the guessing game, I have to comment on the shocking and surprising fact that this is the only disciplinary notice of 2016. I find that astonishing when one considers the nonsense in RNS’s that is highlighted on a daily basis by ShareProphets.

It's also disappointing to note that the company is taking the sole blame here and paying the fine so, in effect, the shareholders are bearing the brunt of the penalty, rather then the Directors or any advisors

Anyway, moving on.

The key part of the Notice is as follows:

“The ADC held that the Company ought to have informed its nomad and sought advice regarding a series of business developments. It further held that it was not appropriate for the Company to decide whether or not the business developments were disclosable based solely on its own assessment of its obligations under the AIM Rules, without reference to its nomad. The ADC considered that this was precisely the type of issue that falls within AIM Rule 31 and where an AIM company should be seeking advice from its nomad.”

So let’s try and pull this all together and see if we can work out who it might be.

Well, to start we know it’s an AIM company that has behaved so poorly in recent times as to actually receive the only AIM disciplinary notice of the year. So poorly in fact that one would have to assume that it was probably suspended very suddenly when a dreadful piece of evidence finally came to light; perhaps it was sitting on a critical piece of price-sensitive information (well done to the whistle-blower I reckon) and perhaps even when quizzed by the Nomad about the reason for a share price movement for the purposes of issuing a “speeding ticket” RNS, it decided to keep that same information to itself.

I’m also guessing that it then probably stayed suspended for a few days while the Nomad went through all the “business developments” and came clean on a whole range of different matters perhaps as far ranging as moving its UK operations from one subsidiary to another and certain related party transactions.

So who could this anonymous AIM company be?

Any ideas?

No, me neither.

Filed under:

Never miss a story.

This area of the site is for independent financial commentary. These blogs are provided by independent authors via a common carrier platform and do not represent the opinions of does not monitor, approve, endorse or exert editorial control over these articles and does not therefore accept responsibility for or make any warranties in connection with or recommend that you or any third party rely on such information. The information available at is for your general information and use and is not intended to address your particular requirements. In particular, the information does not constitute any form of advice or recommendation by and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any investment decisions.

More on CTAG


Comments are turned off for this article.

Site by Everywhen