By Tom Winnifrith | Wednesday 29 September 2021
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.
The FCA is meant to regulate the Standard List of the LSE. Cripes it is not just at the back I hear sniggering, you are all laughing out loud. Please be serious and let us treat the FCA with the respect that it is due. Standard Listed Chill Brands (CHLL) has misled investors as to its trading position. What will the FCA do about it? I have written a letter this morning.
Investor deception by Standard Listed Chill Brands – formal censure needed.
According to your own press office: “The Market Oversight Directorate of the FCA is responsible, among other things, for monitoring issuers’ compliance with the FCA’s Listing Rules, Prospectus Rules, Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules along with the UK Market Abuse Regulation.
The Primary Markets Monitoring (PMM) team monitors the market on a real-time basis to make sure it operates smoothly. This includes actively monitoring regulatory information services, media, other forums and price movements.”
After your abject failure to deal with black and white evidence of fraud at Umuthi (UHS) and Supply@ME Capital (SYME) many may not believe you, but I shall take your word for it.
In this vein Standard Listed Chill Brands issued a trading statement on May 17 when it was known as Zoetic (ZOE) in which it stated:
“Following receipt of the orders outlined above, the Group is trading profitably. Going forward, the Group intends to report on its sales on a quarterly basis.”
Since then there have been two trading statements and two results announcements but no comment on profitability. But in today’s statement we saw that between April 1 2021 and 31 August 2021 the company suffered an underlying operating cashburn of c£520,000 pcm.
I accept that Chill might have been profitable between May 1 and May 14 ( the period referred to in the May 17 trading statement) but I suggest to you that there is no chance whatsoever that it has been anywhere near profitable since then. In fact, it has been suffering huge losses.
I suggest that this is a massive change in trading and that in failing to infirm investors of its rapidly worsening trading position it breached all of your rules. This is something its adviser Allenby should have ensured did not happen. I urge a prompt investigation and serious public censure of both Chill and of Allenby.
I remain, as ever,
Your obedient servant