I mean Carve of course. Looking forward to his incisive explanation as to why the Q&A actually means disaster for shareholders, followed by the usual disclaimer that what he says might not actually happen (as he has taken to doing recently).
Strapped in, glass of wine in hand, waiting in eager anticipation.
I was impressed with quality of questions. None attacking the present board and all quite positive and what genuine holders were wanting to ask. Also impressed with answers, and BOD avoided criticising previous management or providing guarantees that they cannot guarantee.
Questions still hanging for me (perhaps to pursue on Friday 13th next month are: 1. What is the condition of these 5 drilling rigs. From photo gallery, they look less than great - and it sounds like 6th one has landed on Mars. But new rigs from LO are likely to be A1, and LGO rigs also looks br and new. So any future for our famous five. 2. Do we intend to encourage CTR to be successful and steer management iowards performance rather than bluster? 3. Will some light pressure be put on IOP to apply to relist on NSX. Note Mr Chen suggests we write to the company and start putting some gentle pressure on. Even a half-decent share price for IOP might have given us funds for Lind, had IOP fulfilled their promise to list before end of 2104.
Were there really only 14 attendees at AGM? I thought there were 1,000 going from RIG alone.
Very informative and constructive Q&A. I particularly like point 25 where Range make the comment "...We aim to monitor Citation's performance closely both at the project and corporate level". Looks like they don't trust PL either.
I also like the fact that the next Q&A is already scheduled for February and as yet no further problems relating to the Lind loan so it appears that negotiations have not yet hit any major barriers.
Lots to comment about, o elephant's ear with soggy bottom. These are 3 of the very few rules you seem determined to continually flout: You will not; 1. publish content that is not your original work, or infringes the copyright or other rights of any third party. 2. post non-constructive, meaningless, one word (or short) non-sense posts. 3. post links to, or otherwise publish any content containing any form of advertising, promotion for goods and services, spam, or other unsolicited communication.
My first reaction is that the 7 pages of Q & A are as positive as they could be. Plenty to discuss. Not seen you tube video because posting flouts rules and don't want to get into trouble too. But, yes, weekend and time to party. :-))
We all laughed 12 years ago when Pillinger got us to invest loads of money and then believed his Beagle2 had landed intact on Mars, depite no radio signals. But he went to his grave believing it had landed. A very positive man - could he be right? Could CH be right?
You asked me why, but you know as well as I do. You don't like anyone expressing a view that you perceive might affect your bank balance when we come out of suspension. Don't try to twist it around to say it was me doing the abusing. You will look silly.
CH post addressed to yuffspetpoodle (after he and I had expressed concern about the companies assets being sold while we were suspended): "I will not perpetuate the term you and your devious cronies are constantly repeating re our assets. I prefer to see it as consolidating our operations in Trinidad but I guess if you repeat phrase often enough it will become "fact" in some people's minds. You ask why we remain in suspension despite the ease at which we could appoint two new NEDs to the board, simple really to prevent the cynical manipulators trashing the sp further while finances and operations on the ground in TT are sorted. I would rather they stay in suspension another three months and then come out with a much improved operation although I can see how that would panic some traders with locked in trades. Posters like Alocasia are becoming desperate and I would love to know just how much they stand to lose by this "impass"."
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.