Stefan Bernstein explains how the EU/Greenland critical raw materials partnership benefits GreenRoc. Watch the full 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.
Care to explain Regulator? What parts of the statements (especially mine) are 'factually' incorrect?
I concur some of what I wrote is my oppion and you may have a different one which is something we are both entitled to.
Going by your user name you appear to be someone who thinks only your oppion is correct....so the floor is yours, why factually am I wrong?
"IF the GLP took up the Innova scandal instead, that would be worthwile. Theyre just using abingdon as acricket bat to beat the govt with."
They are going after DHSC over Innova...
"Completely agree codejunkie but The GLP will not be interested in the Innova contracts as they are not a Brittish company.
Their main beef with Abingdon is we are British. Pumping billions of tax payers money into the Chinese (or any other country) economy is all fine but the goverment helping a brittish company to compete with the likes of Innova so we can keep the money and employment in the UK is seen by them as state aid and scandal.
They formed as an anti brexit organisation so any pro Brittish / brexit policy they will be all over.
All a bit embarrassing really, the Chinese goverment must love them!"
I love posts like this - they're a clear indication of people lacking intellectual capacity who need to be filtered.
Completely agree codejunkie but The GLP will not be interested in the Innova contracts as they are not a Brittish company.
Their main beef with Abingdon is we are British. Pumping billions of tax payers money into the Chinese (or any other country) economy is all fine but the goverment helping a brittish company to compete with the likes of Innova so we can keep the money and employment in the UK is seen by them as state aid and scandal.
They formed as an anti brexit organisation so any pro Brittish / brexit policy they will be all over.
All a bit embarrassing really, the Chinese goverment must love them!
GLP doesnt have the balls to mention the name of Innova, let alone including them in their case. Innova will instantly sue them for damaging the company's reputation and push GLP into bankruptcy via a never ending lawsuits even though we all know the rubbish quality of Innova's products.
IF the GLP took up the Innova scandal instead, that would be worthwile. Theyre just using abingdon as acricket bat to beat the govt with.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/matt-han****-covid-contracts-emails-whatsapp-b1924417.html
Yes, great response....stick that in your pipe GLP!
I would say we must have strong grounds to counter sue the GLP and or DHSC, under defamation of the company's hard earned reputation which has lead to loss of income, jobs and millions off the companies SP value.
Probably would be best if we shareholders did this over the company itself......any volunteers to lead the group :)
Wow a very comprehensive response to the hearsay being spouted by GLP at Abingdon. Goodness knows how much the time and cost involved in preparing it. Can that be claimed if we go to court ?
Good to see Abingdon fighting back, they replied in a tweet to GLP rubbish:
“ We continue to ask @GoodLawProject to refrain from making unsubstantiated assertions that are damaging to our Company – read our corrections to their factual inaccuracies here: https://www.abingdonhealth.com/app/uploads/2021/08/2021.05.04-Letter-to-Rook-Irwin-Sweeney-LLP-V4.pdf “
“ We've also published our ‘Detailed Grounds for Resistance’ to ensure @GoodLawProject's factual inaccuracies are addressed – you can read it here: https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/ABDX/disclosure-of-detailed-grounds-for-resistance/15091138 “
https://twitter.com/abingdon_health/status/1440351314001625100
Lots of hearsay and rumour...but not much substance or factual evidence.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qX72qFI4j3lsDugNIetd1icv-EAsQQdP/view