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.
Hi all. Sorry, I am a behind the curve on all this and I just don't have time to read back through all the posts to find out what everyone thinks. Persoanlly, I am in no way against reaching out to the press, but that letter seems more like a smear of Zaza and the company. Is it meant to come across as a threat to Zaza? Ie. Reply or we send this to the press?
MP - so your 'translation smear' didn't work -so now we have another set of twists and turns to show that I must be dodgy and so therefore - your view must be right! Thats your logic?
Perhaps if you indulged in less of the flimsy character assassination diversion-type stuff and tried to go down the more productive and reasoned debate road then I might have paid more attention to you.
Having said that, there is one thing in your post that I am happy to consider.
Looed - It's nothing to do with whether you agree with me, it's about contacting reporters and opening the door to the GD being able to criticise FRR, through the lack of Comms. It was the same a few months ago when you wanted to go down the same path after the arbitration. IMHO this is detrimental to FRR getting a favourable result. Hence, whether my perceived view of this matter is right or wrong, when you suggested this path I started to look at your credentials. Your late and intense arrival on this BB, with often mutual recognition of SR's posts and coupled with a continued push to involve reporters signalled alarm bells. All I'm asking is that you refrain until after the election and then contact Linsenmayer first, rather than ZM or SN, due to the possibility of opening channels with the NY and Texas cases, which appear closed. If Linsenmayer doesn't respond, then by all means go direct or through the Embassy or Politicians, but after the election. It's only 42 more days.
Aurora1 - sorry - I was being a bit lazy and using my reply to you to also answer the one or two others who tried to invoke the 'legitimacy' question.
Im not hear to debate your legitimacy Looed if you have sent the proof of shares to the shareholder group Im good with that it wasnt me that questioned. However I would ask that after you get no reply from the company can you wait till after the election to send to anyone else please as I think its a short sighted idea
cheers
Aurora
Aurora1 - I was 'validated' by FSHG when the translation system was set up. I asked the fund holders if they wanted to included in all the in / out with the translator but they preferred not to be involved. To ensure transparency, we have a 3rd party involved who is copied in on all the correspondance between me and the translator.
Its a bit rich to have my integrity questioned now - when the translation system was set I ask if anyone here wanted to be involved to ensure transparency / should I not be available - and not a single person offered to help.
How my not agreeing with MP means I am manipulating translations is as nonsensical as his earlier claim that our translator is a GD plant. He really doesn't like it when people don't agree with his POV. Like all trolls, all he can do is try to make it personal.
Looed how many shares do you have and have you signed up to the frontera shareholders group ?
thats the easiest way to validate any doubts on the board here. You have put in an amazing amount of hours service to all of us and I thank you for that
tsbs1 - As someone who is an optimist, it is only logical that I will find differences with the pessimists on this BB. When some of those pessimists side with poster's like StarRage and other's are then likening them to a 'tag team', it is only logical to have some doubt about their integrity from time to time. The rollercoaster ride that has been attributed to this share, has caused many to sway from both polar positions many times (I think from memory this includes you). Therefore, when ODR sees the significance of possible negotiations and the possibility of harm to FRR by contact prior to the election, it carries far more weight, due to his normal pessimistic stance. It is not ODR's alignment with me, but his change from pessimism to the possibility of a deal and the acknowledgement of the risk posed by contact at this time.
tsbs1....spot on comment !
madp
you doubted OdR integrity but now he has the same view as you his integrity is beyond question ? jesus !
theres never been any question about his integrity hes one of most genuine to post regular of this bb and just about the biggest realist
Ziggy - After the election by all means send the letter to FRR's lawyer's in the California case. As a summons in the Texas or NY case could be detrimental, I would avoid any direct contact. If the letter was from the shareholders group it would carry more weight, and Linsenmayer could advise if it was detrimental to the chances of FRR's success.
Will say that Ziggys replies read as very sensible & good way going forward.
Mad
I suppose
If the letter is sent to the company , with explanations of our intentions if they fail to respond then that puts the next stage and any consequences firmly in their court .
If they fail to engage or just fob us off with a meaningless statement they do so knowing the letter will be forwarded to others .
They far more than us , are in the best position to gauge what potential harm it may do to the company, assuming its still fit for purpose .
After the letter is sent to them their actions will determine our actions , so election timings at this stage is not an issue .
I have argued with ODR on many occasions on here and we rarely agree on anything, but even ODR agrees with me about holding back until after the election and posted the following @ 10:53 :-
Saying SR is TW is as ridiculous as say EkXoc is Zaza.
It seems to me that almost everyone supports Looed's message, and the first draft is an excellent start, but that a slight majority appear to support delaying until after the election.
The first time in a while that Madp and myself have the same view :).
Thank you ODR. I may have doubted you're integrity at times on here, but I don't anymore.