2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
117 päivää sitten
Tarjoustasot
Nasdaq Copenhagen
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 28.5. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.1. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 27.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 22.5.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q3 -tulosraportti 25.11.2024 |
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
·2 t sitten · MuokattuToday's text (day 54) https://open.substack.com/pub/wildceo/p/game-over-day-54-how-the-note-became?r=5lpe1c&utm_medium=ios Listen and understand why and how Elena's claim has arisen and why it is legal. And here excerpted from the post, which in my opinion is the important thing to note; "The choice on 11 May is not Mark Abraham versus Teis Gullitz-Wormslev. The choice is operational company versus wind-down." So: Restructuring versus bankruptcy, as a shareholder I choose the former And also ask yourself why Mark Abraham sits here every afternoon live and spends time on the post afterwards. I will neither interpret nor explain anything to anyone in this context, that part each individual must take responsibility for, I am merely responsible for the dissemination here on Nordnet social (the former shareville 😀)
·26 min sitten26 million approx was probably what actually led the company to liquidation now. One could well have managed, with around 100 million I possible financing. It's simply something I cannot comprehend. I really hope not, but May 11th doesn't look good for us shareholders. Still hope it turns out in our favor. Also Fordi, there will be a greater chance for the truth in this. If the liquidator wins, then it will just be shut down. Hope rottenness doesn't win.- 1 päivä sitten1 päivä sittenGAME OVER | Day 53: The Independence Argument. Neither I am independent. Neither is the liquidator. Today Børsen wrote an article that — accidentally — proved exactly that. The only path forward is an independent reconstructor on 11 May. https://substack.wildceo.live/p/game-over-day-53-the-independence
·1 päivä sittenLatest article I really hope that the investors who are about to go to court for Mark against the liquidator/former trustee, direct their focus towards Mark instead. The man has kept the EIFO case secret, and is trying to abscond with your money/shares of the assets as investors. Fortunately, I got out last spring when auditors and professional investors raised questions that Mark could not answer. But it's a shame that people's investments have probably been swindled by such a person, and therefore I'm happy to share. 1. The girlfriend apparently tried to flee with the money. 2. The debt is not mentioned at all in the annual report?! 3. The debt is max 1.2 million euro, so how can they ever demand 217 million DKK for that business. 4. André Fehrn could not obligate Shape to the debt at all without the board's acceptance. "From Børsen's material on the case, it appears that Elena Pasat in mid-January unsuccessfully tried to get the company's bank connection Unicredit in Romania to convert the promissory note into cash. " "Shape Robotics has not mentioned in its Danish accounts that the company had an obligation of 217 million DKK for the payment of the subsidiary's promissory note to Elena Pasat. " "So the debt comes in addition to what has already been listed in Shape Robotics’ official accounts. In the latest audited annual report from 2024, the total debt in the company was stated as 310 million DKK. When Shape Robotics in 2021 announced the acquisition of Elena Pasat's company Story Kids, it was indeed stated in a company announcement that the payment for the acquisition was regulated by an earn-out agreement, which was performance-dependent. But it also appeared that the consideration, which Shape Robotics was to pay for the acquisition, could at most amount to 1.2 million euro. " "According to the signing rules for Shape Robotics A/S, CEO André Fehrn could indeed not sign for the company himself without acceptance from either the chairman of the board or the entire board. And no one other than André Fehrn has signed as guarantor on the promissory note."
·1 päivä sittenOne can well understand that the auditor(s) have left Mark and no Danish lawyers want to put their name to it.- ·1 päivä sittenExciting plan, but will it work in a true rule of law state and will the other creditors just let it happen..? Both father and sister magically have creditor claims against the company. How crazy does it get, and is this a small family business or a publicly listed company in the end. Even if it were true, it screams that the CEO acts in his own interests, just like all other actions he has taken. A real Romanian wheeler-dealer, one can safely say, even if he gets quite mad when he reads along 🤣🤣🤣 “If voting creditors, representing at least 60 pct. of the creditor mass, vote for such a plan, the rest of the creditors must also accept it. And it is in that count that the disputed promissory note becomes crucial. For if the promissory note is valid, Elena Pasat is owed 217 mio. kr. in the bankruptcy estate. In addition, a company related to Mark Abraham's father, Moby Industries Srl, has filed claims in the estate for 45 mio. kr. When the Maritime and Commercial Court on May 11 is to decide whether the company should go into reconstruction, Mark Abraham's two close family members will thus state that they represent 62.2 pct. of the voting creditor mass and can thereby enforce a compulsory composition of 99.99 pct. “·1 päivä sitten · MuokattuWho the hell also writes a blank check like that. Amusing and tragic. Does that look like breach of trust? Mark seizes the ball and tries to stage a coup in the company. That then looks like fraud..... Hope Teis has the resources to scrutinize everything.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
117 päivää sitten
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·2 t sitten · MuokattuToday's text (day 54) https://open.substack.com/pub/wildceo/p/game-over-day-54-how-the-note-became?r=5lpe1c&utm_medium=ios Listen and understand why and how Elena's claim has arisen and why it is legal. And here excerpted from the post, which in my opinion is the important thing to note; "The choice on 11 May is not Mark Abraham versus Teis Gullitz-Wormslev. The choice is operational company versus wind-down." So: Restructuring versus bankruptcy, as a shareholder I choose the former And also ask yourself why Mark Abraham sits here every afternoon live and spends time on the post afterwards. I will neither interpret nor explain anything to anyone in this context, that part each individual must take responsibility for, I am merely responsible for the dissemination here on Nordnet social (the former shareville 😀)·26 min sitten26 million approx was probably what actually led the company to liquidation now. One could well have managed, with around 100 million I possible financing. It's simply something I cannot comprehend. I really hope not, but May 11th doesn't look good for us shareholders. Still hope it turns out in our favor. Also Fordi, there will be a greater chance for the truth in this. If the liquidator wins, then it will just be shut down. Hope rottenness doesn't win.
- 1 päivä sitten1 päivä sittenGAME OVER | Day 53: The Independence Argument. Neither I am independent. Neither is the liquidator. Today Børsen wrote an article that — accidentally — proved exactly that. The only path forward is an independent reconstructor on 11 May. https://substack.wildceo.live/p/game-over-day-53-the-independence
- ·1 päivä sittenLatest article I really hope that the investors who are about to go to court for Mark against the liquidator/former trustee, direct their focus towards Mark instead. The man has kept the EIFO case secret, and is trying to abscond with your money/shares of the assets as investors. Fortunately, I got out last spring when auditors and professional investors raised questions that Mark could not answer. But it's a shame that people's investments have probably been swindled by such a person, and therefore I'm happy to share. 1. The girlfriend apparently tried to flee with the money. 2. The debt is not mentioned at all in the annual report?! 3. The debt is max 1.2 million euro, so how can they ever demand 217 million DKK for that business. 4. André Fehrn could not obligate Shape to the debt at all without the board's acceptance. "From Børsen's material on the case, it appears that Elena Pasat in mid-January unsuccessfully tried to get the company's bank connection Unicredit in Romania to convert the promissory note into cash. " "Shape Robotics has not mentioned in its Danish accounts that the company had an obligation of 217 million DKK for the payment of the subsidiary's promissory note to Elena Pasat. " "So the debt comes in addition to what has already been listed in Shape Robotics’ official accounts. In the latest audited annual report from 2024, the total debt in the company was stated as 310 million DKK. When Shape Robotics in 2021 announced the acquisition of Elena Pasat's company Story Kids, it was indeed stated in a company announcement that the payment for the acquisition was regulated by an earn-out agreement, which was performance-dependent. But it also appeared that the consideration, which Shape Robotics was to pay for the acquisition, could at most amount to 1.2 million euro. " "According to the signing rules for Shape Robotics A/S, CEO André Fehrn could indeed not sign for the company himself without acceptance from either the chairman of the board or the entire board. And no one other than André Fehrn has signed as guarantor on the promissory note."·1 päivä sittenOne can well understand that the auditor(s) have left Mark and no Danish lawyers want to put their name to it.
- ·1 päivä sittenExciting plan, but will it work in a true rule of law state and will the other creditors just let it happen..? Both father and sister magically have creditor claims against the company. How crazy does it get, and is this a small family business or a publicly listed company in the end. Even if it were true, it screams that the CEO acts in his own interests, just like all other actions he has taken. A real Romanian wheeler-dealer, one can safely say, even if he gets quite mad when he reads along 🤣🤣🤣 “If voting creditors, representing at least 60 pct. of the creditor mass, vote for such a plan, the rest of the creditors must also accept it. And it is in that count that the disputed promissory note becomes crucial. For if the promissory note is valid, Elena Pasat is owed 217 mio. kr. in the bankruptcy estate. In addition, a company related to Mark Abraham's father, Moby Industries Srl, has filed claims in the estate for 45 mio. kr. When the Maritime and Commercial Court on May 11 is to decide whether the company should go into reconstruction, Mark Abraham's two close family members will thus state that they represent 62.2 pct. of the voting creditor mass and can thereby enforce a compulsory composition of 99.99 pct. “·1 päivä sitten · MuokattuWho the hell also writes a blank check like that. Amusing and tragic. Does that look like breach of trust? Mark seizes the ball and tries to stage a coup in the company. That then looks like fraud..... Hope Teis has the resources to scrutinize everything.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Nasdaq Copenhagen
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 28.5. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.1. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 27.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 22.5.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q3 -tulosraportti 25.11.2024 |
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
117 päivää sitten
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 28.5. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.1. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 27.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 22.5.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q3 -tulosraportti 25.11.2024 |
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·2 t sitten · MuokattuToday's text (day 54) https://open.substack.com/pub/wildceo/p/game-over-day-54-how-the-note-became?r=5lpe1c&utm_medium=ios Listen and understand why and how Elena's claim has arisen and why it is legal. And here excerpted from the post, which in my opinion is the important thing to note; "The choice on 11 May is not Mark Abraham versus Teis Gullitz-Wormslev. The choice is operational company versus wind-down." So: Restructuring versus bankruptcy, as a shareholder I choose the former And also ask yourself why Mark Abraham sits here every afternoon live and spends time on the post afterwards. I will neither interpret nor explain anything to anyone in this context, that part each individual must take responsibility for, I am merely responsible for the dissemination here on Nordnet social (the former shareville 😀)·26 min sitten26 million approx was probably what actually led the company to liquidation now. One could well have managed, with around 100 million I possible financing. It's simply something I cannot comprehend. I really hope not, but May 11th doesn't look good for us shareholders. Still hope it turns out in our favor. Also Fordi, there will be a greater chance for the truth in this. If the liquidator wins, then it will just be shut down. Hope rottenness doesn't win.
- 1 päivä sitten1 päivä sittenGAME OVER | Day 53: The Independence Argument. Neither I am independent. Neither is the liquidator. Today Børsen wrote an article that — accidentally — proved exactly that. The only path forward is an independent reconstructor on 11 May. https://substack.wildceo.live/p/game-over-day-53-the-independence
- ·1 päivä sittenLatest article I really hope that the investors who are about to go to court for Mark against the liquidator/former trustee, direct their focus towards Mark instead. The man has kept the EIFO case secret, and is trying to abscond with your money/shares of the assets as investors. Fortunately, I got out last spring when auditors and professional investors raised questions that Mark could not answer. But it's a shame that people's investments have probably been swindled by such a person, and therefore I'm happy to share. 1. The girlfriend apparently tried to flee with the money. 2. The debt is not mentioned at all in the annual report?! 3. The debt is max 1.2 million euro, so how can they ever demand 217 million DKK for that business. 4. André Fehrn could not obligate Shape to the debt at all without the board's acceptance. "From Børsen's material on the case, it appears that Elena Pasat in mid-January unsuccessfully tried to get the company's bank connection Unicredit in Romania to convert the promissory note into cash. " "Shape Robotics has not mentioned in its Danish accounts that the company had an obligation of 217 million DKK for the payment of the subsidiary's promissory note to Elena Pasat. " "So the debt comes in addition to what has already been listed in Shape Robotics’ official accounts. In the latest audited annual report from 2024, the total debt in the company was stated as 310 million DKK. When Shape Robotics in 2021 announced the acquisition of Elena Pasat's company Story Kids, it was indeed stated in a company announcement that the payment for the acquisition was regulated by an earn-out agreement, which was performance-dependent. But it also appeared that the consideration, which Shape Robotics was to pay for the acquisition, could at most amount to 1.2 million euro. " "According to the signing rules for Shape Robotics A/S, CEO André Fehrn could indeed not sign for the company himself without acceptance from either the chairman of the board or the entire board. And no one other than André Fehrn has signed as guarantor on the promissory note."·1 päivä sittenOne can well understand that the auditor(s) have left Mark and no Danish lawyers want to put their name to it.
- ·1 päivä sittenExciting plan, but will it work in a true rule of law state and will the other creditors just let it happen..? Both father and sister magically have creditor claims against the company. How crazy does it get, and is this a small family business or a publicly listed company in the end. Even if it were true, it screams that the CEO acts in his own interests, just like all other actions he has taken. A real Romanian wheeler-dealer, one can safely say, even if he gets quite mad when he reads along 🤣🤣🤣 “If voting creditors, representing at least 60 pct. of the creditor mass, vote for such a plan, the rest of the creditors must also accept it. And it is in that count that the disputed promissory note becomes crucial. For if the promissory note is valid, Elena Pasat is owed 217 mio. kr. in the bankruptcy estate. In addition, a company related to Mark Abraham's father, Moby Industries Srl, has filed claims in the estate for 45 mio. kr. When the Maritime and Commercial Court on May 11 is to decide whether the company should go into reconstruction, Mark Abraham's two close family members will thus state that they represent 62.2 pct. of the voting creditor mass and can thereby enforce a compulsory composition of 99.99 pct. “·1 päivä sitten · MuokattuWho the hell also writes a blank check like that. Amusing and tragic. Does that look like breach of trust? Mark seizes the ball and tries to stage a coup in the company. That then looks like fraud..... Hope Teis has the resources to scrutinize everything.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Nasdaq Copenhagen
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt