The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen 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.
awful lot of negatives in that 2nd part:
"adverse", "NOT", "contrary".
They seem to have lost the sense of what they were trying to say.
lol. The fact you had to read it a few times and still suffered from confirmation bias says a little bit about you. The statement is not two separate points, rather it is just one.
It sucks, they made the wrong call, but the statement is clear. Maybe have some strong coffee and wait for the appeal.
Well that's you off my Xmas card list Mr. Love Pump.
Filtered
Well I've read it a few times now, and still come to the conclusion that it states there were two reasons for grounds for refusal.
1. "the need for the scheme had NOT been demonstrated"
AND
2. "that the adverse impacts of the scheme on highways, noise, lighting and air quality would NOT be significant, contrary to local planning policy."
Considering the article was wrote by Ruth Hayhurst, I can only assume it was a Freudian slip as she knows very well it should not have been refused - every utterance by a witness is admissible.
How odd: the 2nd part of the conclusion seems to contradict the 1st part.
Yes you have read it wrong. There are two "nots" in the sentence. "....the need for the scheme had not been demonstrated..."
"The committee then agreed by 9-1 on the grounds for refusal: that the need for the scheme had NOT been demonstrated and that the adverse impacts of the scheme on highways, noise, lighting and air quality would NOT be significant, contrary to local planning policy."
From Drill or Drop ......
"The committee then agreed by 9-1 on the grounds for refusal: that the need for the scheme had not been demonstrated and that the adverse impacts of the scheme on highways, noise, lighting and air quality would not be significant, contrary to local planning policy."
Am I a thicko this morning - am I reading that correctly? - "that the adverse impacts of the scheme" - "WOULD NOT BE SIGNIFICANT"
Surely if they are not significant, then they are not grounds for refusal.
https://drillordrop.com/2020/06/29/villagers-applaud-surprise-council-rejection-of-ukogs-dunsfold-drilling-plans/
Not necessarily all salary if you read the RNS correctly. It does not specify salary.
"These include a significant cut of 20-50% to Directors' remuneration"
Remuneration includes salary, pension, bonus and share based payments so don't get conned into thinking it is all salary.
At a corporate level, the Company has also instigated a number of wide-ranging cost savings, many of which were underway before the pandemic struck. These include a significant cut of 20-50% to Directors’ remuneration together with a reduction in non-core and non-essential asset-related activities.
If you remember, salary levels were cut back.
Tollesbury Also this company is cash short so what’s your take on sandos massive salary and bonus when he hasn’t done anything to justify it?
Same for a lot of us, too much down to sell out at the minute.
Why would I do that when I’m 95% down and what is left would only buy a cheap used car. Maybe I should average down again hey? You been ramping this dog for years but gone a bit quiet recently, you averaging down or selling out? I just hope that sando can do something right for once and we get a spike and I will get out with a 50% loss which will be over 25k, A dream.
Here they come again. The 1 post gang telling everyone it’s a bargain for one more attempt to ramp this dog. It’s dead in the water and Sando has taken all lth money with his Titanic style of leadership. I expect sando to go quiet for months, the sp to sink even lower before we have another massive dilution to put the boot lth for the last time and then the fat lady will be ordered from Amazon . Trousers walks away with a nice earner and disappears to take early retirement and we have to work are balls off to earn the money back he diluted to death with his false promises and quarter truths.
Think 10p is overly optimistic, 5p target sure the board can get their act together and achieve this. Some hear some listen.
I see he's turned up as Oilgushing with he "UKUtd" badge and the awful English again.