Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
b1gdeano
Who, for example, is the CFO? Now check out admission requirements.
.
.
Some proper research for you (smiley)
.
.
djwall1s
Good post there.
I am behind you on clarity - if you do anything to ask for that, you have my full support.
I would urge others to consider DJ's point, whether you like him or dislike him or his previous posts.
Good Business gotta have clarity and simplicity.
Do you mean that you can't name the executive directors? hahaha
.
.
What? You mean the directors that are public knowledge already? Or the secret ones we haven't been told about?
b1gdeano
You'll have no problem in naming the executive directors given your knowledge - I look forward to their respective names and positions.
TIA
.
.
'Looks like we find out soon.'
The company has to start talking to shareholders like we're adults though. If it's a case of waiting on trademarks to go live then just say it, it would be better fessing up than allowing conspiracy theories to flourish.
I don't mind admitting the company's comms on the whole this year have been pretty naff and shareholders have been treated as if we couldn't be kept in the loop as the company beavered away (and I do believe they have been/are working hard, that is obvious when you nitpick the RNS). But the culture of keeping quiet to the point of paranoia needs to change imo.
This year might have been 'exciting' for the company in terms of expansion and development but it's been no fun for holders. I was targeting 2019 anyway so no biggie from that pov for me though. If Goldbloc truly has morphed into something far more special/significant than initially planned then a few months more wait is not exactly that great of a pain to bear.
They could list the directors as it stood then and notify market when directors added as per usual no reason to delay. The admission document would be accompanied with a prospectus too where the plans would be laid out for the future etc. Stop being such a pretentious prick.
Anyone aware of the compliance and regulatory issues for an admission document would not be suggesting that an incomplete version would be acceptable. For a start, all director particulars must be included. To state that the full BoD is in the process of finalisation would simply preclude the submission - there are minimum statutory requirements.
Guess what? A complete admission document is there to protect shareholders - go figure.
.
.
DYOR
.
Yes duster. It will cost a fair bit more now as it's a complete new IPO in essence but with an existing share register, if they maintain the company as it stands that is.
djwall1s
You have a point and am personally not bothered by relisting, as I have said that so often.
Some people have natural worry about their money vanishing, I cant guarantee that, neither can you.
At the same time there are inconsistencies in the RNS.
We cant blame each other for this scenario.
You dont need to agree with us, you are fairly smart and I hope youre right.
But as a fellow investor - you could just support someone like me.
All i want is the real picture to come out as share holder.
I can live with delay, I posted weeks ago that Lionsgold does NOT have money to do whatever they are doing.
I am not shocked at the pace, I am completely annoyed with these IFs Buts and juggling from BoD
Not from you or others who I have a different view
Yes FC. Let's see if the info they release makes sense with the actions taken. What we have been told so far doesn't.
I see no reason why they should not have come back to market at this point in time - absolutely no reason not to - shirley it will cost much more £ now to list again ?????
Still not reason to not make the deadline to remain listed. It's been said many times but they could have submitted the admission document with their aims all laid out explaining where they are at, and what they are waiting on (trademarks etc) there is no reason to delist that I can see other than they didn't want to be listed.
Sorry, ignore my use of the word 'patent', I meant trademark.
"I thought, wrongly so far, that this would be a good thing to discuss?"
I'm thinking that if the product is being (now?) dictated by this XBG ticker (which may be a really key feature for these 'multiple jurisdictions' talked about), then according to the Trademarkia website it can take 3 months after publication date for it be certificated afaics. See Step 4 on the below page.
So from October 19th publishing date it could take us to January 19th. If Goldbloc is dependant on this XGB patent to operate fully across 'multiple jurisdictions', then it could explain the further delay. They simply can't operate without the trademark? In the meantime we have crashed headlong into AIM delisting rules.
https://www.trademarkia.com/
This is all just my supposition based on the websites own times and what we've been told by LION. I think it's something we could ask at the AGM, whether the delay/delist actually hinges on the potential 3-month waiting time on this trademark. How critical is this trademark to the product?
I thought, wrongly so far, that this would be a good thing to discuss?
Do we really need more posts like the majority on this board, non consequential?
Firstly has the Live testing phase finished?
According to the RNS it should have in September: https://www.investegate.co.uk/lionsgold-limited--lion-/rns/goldbloc-in-live-testing-phase/201807311245453409W/
Then how long after will Goldbloc launch?