Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. 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.
There is no 20% circuit breaker on aim, kitty
Because their name would keep being mentioned in the same breath as criminals. Because less educated people would assume it's the fault of the auditors to not know everything. Why associate yourself with all the potentially bad press and have your name mentioned in every article with them?
Because their name would keep being mentioned in the same breath as criminals. Because less educated people would assume it's the fault of the auditors to not know everything. Why associate yourself with all the potentially bad press and have your name mentioned in every article with them?
I also don't get it..why the big four "don't want to touch boohoo"? And why everybody supposes that then something really bad must be within the company? It makes no sense. Let's assume boohoo lied about everything and only made 2 pennys a year what would be the problem for the auditors? I mean they just do their job and if they find fraud they report it. That's even a good thing if they discover something like this, isn't it??
This is obviously being posted as bad for Boo Nd is hitting the share price accordingly but I'm thinking its more about the audit companies not wanting to have to audit the supply chain. They just want to do their nice easy high level audits and get paid not actually work so maybe it's Boo saying they are going to do all this work to clean up the chain and show all their workings that's putting the auditors off. If there is a financial issue then PWC are already accountable so their leaving doesn't help them.
Just a different perspective on events DYOR
Steve agree - 20% circuit breaker - just as I had a buy quote open
Let’s see if they reconnect the circuit tomorrow & it dies t blow a fuse
Personally I think this is way overblown like the ASOS drop which is recovering well so expect the same here
Just trying to decide new entry point
Tomorrow 7am may help ...
PWC are probably shorting at the same time so they can afford to cover the lawsuit against them from Southern Africa's largest supermarket chain...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-13/pwc-hit-by-40-million-lawsuit-from-botswana-supermarket-chain
Yessss and the big four are squeaky clean!
https://amp-ft-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.ft.com/content/78f46a4e-0a5c-11ea-bb52-34c8d9dc6d84?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#aoh=16031391653476&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2F78f46a4e-0a5c-11ea-bb52-34c8d9dc6d84
@kitty at 20% it most probably hit a circuit breaker, can't find anything on them for AIM.
https://www.fca.org.uk/publications/research/analysis-circuit-breakers-uk-equity-markets
Bablake nothing to prove to you
I took my profits & got a Big Mac Meal with a bit of change to get a Smarties McFlurry
Pretty damn fair analysis imv.
They bang on and on as if know the lot.
Snowwoman agree might be best thing for them
So if 4 of the big 6 (or 4 out of 5 top auditors) are not interested in taking on the audit, that means 2 are. So, if 2 are, what's the problem. Answer, there is none, just an implied one by omission reporting.
It was suspended from 16:21 today at 20%
They could suspend until issues cleared up & resume trading
EUA was 6 months I think in total
To be quite honest kitty id be pleased if they suspend it until they have sorted things out as I won’t have to bother with any of this drama. When EUA suspended, the shorters got very burnt as the price gapped up massively in the days after suspension. This is fantasy land but so is a lot of other stuff on this board so why not entertain this idea. Gets my vote!
Happened to many like EUA
They could use last & 3rd to last bullets if they need to protect the SP
Happens
Why would they do that. It does not meet the criteria. A nose dive cos investors smell a rat does not mean a suspension.
Suspension of trading in AIM securities
A company admitted to trading on AIM (company) will have trading in its AIM securities suspended by the London Stock Exchange (LSE) where it ceases to have a nominated adviser (nomad) and does not immediately appoint a new one and may have trading in its AIM securities suspended where:
•
unless the target is another company admitted to trading on AIM or a listed company, such company has announced that a reverse takeover has been agreed or is in contemplation (until it publishes an admission document in respect of the proposed enlarged entity)
•
trading in such company's securities is not being conducted in an orderly manner
•
the LSE considers that such AIM company has failed to comply with the AIM Rules for Companies (AIM Rules)
•
the protection of investors requires a suspension
•
the integrity and reputation of the market has been or may be impaired by dealings in such company's securities, or
•
at the request of the company
If it goes down to 180 then it's mcap would be around 2.7b, for a company that does close to a 1b and is growing by 50% a year, that would be madness! Not saying it won't happen, but it would only be a very temporary un-tradeable dip.
My previously stated support of 294 was obviously a fictitious one.
Yep sizeable bounce for first few minutes in the morning, then big sell off (profit taken) then best get out the scuba gear...
This is going to dive deeper than it did today. You know why because I I have told yo so!!!
They could suspend trading
All depends on RNS ...
As soon as this hits 250 in the morning it will plummet like theres no tomorrow.
Will be very lucky to see this finish above 180
Think he might be suggesting a dead cat bounce