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.
Gonna share your info????
Thanks Nellin62 Your last part has just answered something I was looking into over the weekend. I think though maybe not a cause is certainly a consideration.
Bermondsey, no need to apologise. We all have our opinions. I am aware that some of my posts may be construed as negativity to some, but i am just giving what i believe to be a balanced view. Sure some would not agree though. However, if i am seen as being negative, i will balance that with the following: Based on my previous posts on what i had found out, i do in fact think there is a chance this will all come out alright. If my assumptions are correct, then i think that there have been some issues that needed to be put to rest, with one particular issue taking a bit longer due to ongoing case which hopefully should be finalised soon. If i am right, we are all winners.
Neil. Apologies if that came across rude. Just wanted other people 9n the bb to know the correct position
Neil. Let's stick to fact and not your opinion. The tax losses cannot be used. There is also anti avoidance on selling companies with losses. They cannot be accessed by whatever group this was transferred into. Fact. The bit you want to read up on is a major change in nature / conduct of trade.
JT14
That's why i don't tend to post much. I previously posted naming names, and associations and their activities, but some didn't like it and had my post removed.
I am not deramping/ramping or anything other, just stating facts as i see them.
I have far more to lose than some on here if it does go bad so don't think that i am just bad mouthing the BOD.
Bermondsey
You are correct, tax losses cannot be "bought like that" or used by an individual. However, these (in my opinion only) will be used by Antos's company, but you will not see them used until that company posts a profit. Any half decent CFO can make use of tax losses legally.
Neil. You can't buy tax losses like that. Huge amounts of anti avoidance. The loss is in the company. It can't be accessed by the individual.
Apple, the 340k antos put in. So if a loss is crystallised then this can be offset against future gains. But you set the loss against gains for a reduction in your tax bill at the prevailing rate. You won't see 340k back. You would see 340k x rate of tax you pay on your gains.
So these tax loss arguments are frankly ******.
Tax losses are worth nothing to us or an incoming either way. It's not that straight forward. Otherwise you'd have a shed load of failing businesses for sale for silly valuations because of those losses.
The technology and the patents on the other hand...
And folks fired at me for a couple of deramper bullet posts...
Neilin62's post is nuke by comparison. Wow. If I had too much in this, I'd no longer be sleeping at night.
Applegarth
Antos can't lose even if BOU goes tits up. He bought Photonstar technology for a quid. Why? Because he inherited a deferred tax asset arising from a taxable loss of some £8.2million. Even if he "loses" his £340k, he still bought an asset giving him £7.86 million!
But then that's to be in the business of willingly losing money... Rather than say double, treble or ten bag it I'm sure you wouldn't want to willingly lose it regardless of how much or how little (it's all relative) you put in here...
Meant to say...offset his tax bills against potential losses from his 340k in Bou?
Could Antos have a back up plan if we lost. ie
offset his tax bills against potential losses from his 340k in Bou? which ever the outcome he is not worried?
Could Antos have a back up plan if we lost. ie offset his 340k share loss. So which ever the outcome he is not worried?
The proof is in the pudding. Therefore we wait. My comments are based on the last few months. I agree, so what if the RNS cost money? An update? Well, if we say an update on what? Afterall, they are working on something, but what? Sure, it is sensitive details for now, I appreciate that. But there was the feeling, we were quite close to something. So October and now February. Who wouldn't worry? It's human nature, not panicking. In the next few weeks, something can happen or we get de-listed. We can all stay optimistic, that's fine. I prefer to be as well and also have a little idea we are on the right track. Let's hope the cake is in the oven.