We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey 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.
Caught out by the nomad (laughing emoji)
Yes they snook around as a well known company with possibly thousands of eyes on them, sneakily posting on probably the joint largest social media posting platform open to billions of people eyes (Muttley laugh)
Spikey, if you said this for your first post I would have been more inclined to agreed with you.
'if a company says nothing about an NDA being in place, that might
mean that there is an NDA in place which precludes discussion or
mention of the NDA - but it might just mean that there is no NDA.
without any public domain evidence one way or the other,
people are just speculating about the possibility of NDAs,
but some posters on here keep mentioning NDAs as fact.'
Bottom line is no one knows as with most of the posts on this BB there's a lot of speculation. However, the progress with flanks licence and the Tipil licence and updated works shown on the satellite images can't be argued with.
anders, read back a bit more carefully.
Spikey, you've just countered your own point perfectly. Everything is speculation by anyone not in the know. You can't say 100% there isn't an NDA either. The NDA would likely have a clause that says you can't make public you're in an NDA anyway.
What we do know is they mentioned banks in an RNS and it's not unreasonable to speculate there would be an NDA involved because a bank would want one of those in place? The fact we've not had a law case against by one of the banks mentioned is good enough for me that those relationships exist. Banks would have come after us by now if that was fake news.
... this being AIM, i doubt very much that all questions will be answered,
whether the company is struck off and liquidated, or it becomes the next
rio tinto. loads happens behind scenes on AIM that is *never* revealed to pis.
laters.
LHG, it appears that you are admitting you are unable to
provide any source showing that your claim of NDAs is factual.
(no problem at all by me if people on this board want to speculate
about such possibilities, but better not to pretend speculation is fact.)
disney has not said anything in the public domain about
an NDA with my local pub. and nor has my local pub.
but that doesn't mean that there is
a secret NDA in place between them.
Just accept we will have a NOMAD and in the course of time all your questions will be answered Spikey. Why the need to keep questioning when the answers will be given to you soon.
anders, you're missing the point, presumably deliberately.
if a company says nothing about an NDA being in place, that might
mean that there is an NDA in place which precludes discussion or
mention of the NDA - but it might just mean that there is no NDA.
without any public domain evidence one way or the other,
people are just speculating about the possibility of NDAs,
but some posters on here keep mentioning NDAs as fact.
"Prior to having NDA's the company have always been good at informing shareholders with tweets photos etc.."
... alternative speculation, prior to getting caught out by the previous nomad
& regulators, the company liked to boost sentiment with tweets, photos, etc...
Spikey:
'LHG, can you provide any factual evidence in the
public domain that says there are NDAs in place?
happy to read the RNS/article/link if so.'
LOL, you have no idea. When I sold my business the NDA specifically said my company couldn't mention anything about the deal to market and there was even a clause that said I couldn't accept a further offer once the DD had started (we verbally agreed the price before putting pen to paper on NDA).
"... I know these things..."
not what i asked, lefthandedgolfer.
i asked you, can you provide any *factual* evidence
in the public domain that says there are NDAs in place?
(... otherwise, you are just speculating...)
Spikes are you really that stupid??? Of course there are NDAs in place. Having been in business I know these things. It usual procedure, anyone with an ounce of common business sense knows this. It tells me you know nothing of business!!
LHG, can you provide any factual evidence in the
public domain that says there are NDAs in place?
happy to read the RNS/article/link if so.
Looks like our resident supposedly none-invested commentator has appeared, morning Spikey.
"Prior to having NDA's..."
some of the enthusiasts here get a bit het up about what they see as
sceptics misrepresenting opinions or speculation as facts. but they never
seem to mind this kind of speculation masquerading as fact ... funny that.
yes, EUA told the market they are in discussions with a new
nomad. but then again again, they also said they were having
conversations with CITIC. and just look where that got 'em.
Look on the positives, the company has told us they were in discussions with new NOMAD, emailed to say they anticipate appointment in advance of deadline, why would they tell us this if they didn't believe it? They even appreciated our displeasure at them. Why would they bother to tell us all this if they were going to delist? Prior to having NDA's the company have always been good at informing shareholders with tweets photos etc. Since the infamous tweet they have not been able to say anything. This week we will know all hopefully and I am have confidence in our Board to deliver for us shareholders.