Kan lure på om OSE har noen opptakskrav på hovedlisten i det hele tatt annet enn at aksjonærene spytter i penger for å betale fees?
Det er på grensen til lureri at selskaper som overhodet ikke har noen kommersiell virksomhet kan handles på hovedlisten.
Mer seriøse markedplasser har krav til topplinje, overskudd og cashflow over noen få år før listing. Det er mulig å liste et selskap uten f.eks. positiv cash flow eller med underskudd enkelte år, men ikke et som idex som i 20 år har vært uten uten salg, uten inntekter og med sterkt negativ cash flow.

Fordelen med slike selskap er dog at det er svært lett å forstå regnskapene. Det er bare å summere kostnadene til fete lederlønninger og bonuser, "konsulent"-honorarer, advokatkostnader, wining, dining og fasan jakt samt litt til noen fotsoldater. Sett en minus foran dette tallet og du har bunnlinje og cashflow (med mindre det har vært en emisjon i perioden).

"Fasan jakt"

Ja, og vi måtte jo ha tweed, må vite...:-)

Ikke vært på fasan jakt hos Keith?
Da er du ikke en av gutta som teller i klubben.

by your reckoning then Amazon would have never existed.

probably the best way to think of this is a biotech company working on a new drug or a mining company wanting to build a mine or an E&P company needing money to drill for oil. These all need money to get to market. Some companies do this through the debt market, some do it through the equity market. At the moment Idex has the option of both should it need it which I think it will.

I don't disagree that the equity market is important for a company that want to innovate, but such companies should not go public. It's not a problem with professional investors who are aware of the risks and can do their due diligence, but the public offering (at least in the primary market) should not happen until the company is in a commercial phase and analysts can cover it with meaningful models.
I agree that Amazon got listed on Nasdaq at a very early stage in it's life and in violation of 2 out of 3 key requirements for listing on Nasdaq (negative cash flow and operating at a loss for the last 3 years before listing). But, Nasdaq can waive some but not all of the requirements, and at the time Amazon went public they were clearly in a commercial phase and passed the sales criteria and it was on a very clear trajectory to profitability (sales increased per Q in 1996 from 0.8 to 2.2 to 4.2 to 8.5) and the business model could be analyzed.
Can you analyze the idex business model? There is no market. It's not even sure it will come and if it comes what rate it will grow. You don't know what price they will get of for the product. You don't know the margins. Idex has obviously presented an hypothesis that they can go break even on a few million units per year. But what's that worth? Idex have not yet produced the product in volumes and they have not yet been in a competitive situation (except for the pilots where they lost all of them, most likely to technical merits because price is not involved at that stage).

Are you suggesting some law that closes off raising capital via the equity markets for companies not yet producing or just stopping private investors investing in them?

I think the first would have a significant impact on innovation and economic growth and the second would be an infringement on an individual's rights.

I agree with you about the difficulty in modeling Idex though which is why there so many varied opinions!

I don't suggest anything other than that OSE should have similar requirements for listing that for example Nasdaq has. That would exclude the all or nothing cases, but not at all be an issue for a commercial company to raise capital for a new product. Even if that new product have risk, the private investor buys into a company with a going business which can be analyzed.
There are sources for capital also for the all or nothing cases. I have worked with that too, both getting such financing and assisting in due diligence. And most of the time that is advantageous for the company and the founders too. No need to waste energy on communicating to a stock market, the communication goes only to the few investors, which may also sit on your board, and the founders will normally get a much larger payback if the company is successful since these owners would normally ask that a large part of the pay for key individuals is in shares or options (which works much better for unlisted companies).

errr yes you are suggesting that. Very clearly suggesting that. What makes it worse is that you are offering your opinion on stocks and without grasping basic financial fundamentals.

For example, obviously you know there is more than one nasdaq market? and that these markets have different listing requirements? and you also know that Idex are considering (like Zwipe) to list in Nasdaq?

I mean if that were the case what you just wrote makes absolutely no sense.

....but don't let little details like that bother you.

errr yes you are suggesting that. Very clearly suggesting that. What makes it worse is that you are offering your opinion on stocks and without grasping basic financial fundamentals.

For example, obviously you know there is more than one nasdaq market? and that these markets have different listing requirements? and you also know that Idex are considering (like Zwipe) to list in Nasdaq?

I mean if that were the case what you just wrote makes absolutely no sense.

....but don't let little details like that bother you.

Yes I know that.
There are other listings on OSE too. But, Idex is listed on the primary list on OSE and I think the comparison if fair. And I think it's unfair to list shares like that on the main list. Obviously the requirements should be less strict on the lower tiers.
Actually OSE used to have a requirement that they did not list companies in a pre-commercial phase on the main list, but it was removed. Can only speculate that it was to increase the income from fees. It's a first level protection of the smaller private investors against ponzi schemes.

And Idex has been in a pre-commercial phase for more that 20 years now. Selling new shares to make old share holders happy, promising huge sales just a few quarters ahead, but never sold anything (excluding the one delivery of "on chip" sensors idex got after acquiring a failed sensor company - the GM was 7%). But, it's about to crumble now, just like sister thin (with different "product" but same cast of characters and same misleading of the messages to the market), Idex is lagging thin and may still manage to pull off one more share issue, but it will not make existing owners happy.

Hvem vet?

31. mai startet en kollaps i aksjen som direkte følge av nyheten om situasjonen rundt Woodford, og frykt for at de ville selge seg ut. Faktum er at de fortsatt ikke har solgt i Idex, og det virker mer og mer sannsynlig at de ikke vil gjøre det, mens de har solgt seg helt ut av Thin Film.
Kursen i Idex 31. mai var 3,18, nå er den 1,45.
Kursen i Thin var 0,15, nå er den 0,232.
Henger ikke på greip...

THIN er blitt et rent gambling, lotto, trading og spekulasjons objekt, med hinsides sinnssyk og direkte løgnaktig haussing, samt usann propaganda, til og med i både DN og FA. Rasjonalitet og logikk er fullstendig fraværende. IDEX kan ende opp på samme måte.