Tower Resources #TRP, Hardman & Co and Edison speak at London South East’s Oil & Gas event Watch Now
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 and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
(that same poster on the other site has also stated that
he has been banned from the lse site, but so far as i can
remember i don’t think he said what his lse ID(s) used to be.)
the character on the other site that you refer to sometimes claims to be
darren chapman, although he has also previously explicitly stated that
he is not, &that (in his own words) that his posting on that site has been
“a charade”. clearly, one of those claims is untrue.. but if it is indeed true
that he is DC, then AE himself has explicitly linked him to the WRN crew,
by naming DC within that ’TI report’, and by saying DC helped fund nuna.
(FCA are already aware of the activities of that poster on the other site.)
In fairness Addinckt, there were a few also on these boards who were pointing out the dangers here. That's what a chat board should be about. AE could hardly argue the fact that he created his blog in the knowledge that those following this saga had no other source of ongoing information. I do wonder if the character on the other site, who is still threatening legal Armageddon, can be linked to the perpetrators. IMHO he should be, he goes way beyond normality for a chat board.
Well at least FCA are looking into matters here...I guess it will
be a chance to gain information rather than make any judgements,
so I do not expect they will be giving much away on the day, but
at least shareholders will have an opportunity to be heard! I expect
many have put in requests for WRN and ~WHET to be investigated...
so hopefully they will have a rounded view of our position..
Thanks EBITDA for sharing...look forward to the update!
one of the interesting points about whetstone is the way in
which the retail pis were led to expect that they would receive
‘gifted’ shares *before* trading commenced, but in fact that was
the very opposite of what happened. so it looks imho like attempts
had been made to stoke up an appetite for whetstone shares ( i.e. to
prime excessive expectations for how that company would progress)
but once pi sentiment had been massaged in that way, they started
using britdaq as a matched trading platform *when only the insiders
were able to sell shares.* .. so far as i can see, there was no commercial
reason whatsoever why they could not have delayed the start of trading
on britdaq until after all gifted shares had been distributed. that would
not have hindered them buying that stake in the terrible company RAP,
or prevented them reaching an ‘agreement’ with the phantom NARC.
setting up in that way, i.e. where only the insiders could sell into the
demand that the blogging etc had helped to create, led to the outcome
visible in the one confirmation statement that whetstone did issue,
which showed massive dumping by two particular crew members. (not
surprising whet doesn’t want to publish another confirmation statement.)
WRN and gifted (lol) shares in WHET
... sorry, posts crossed, thanks.
just for clarity, do you mean your holding of
WRN shares, or your holding of whetstone? tia.
No it was initially about WRN but all other companies and individuals will be discussed
I was contacted as my holding of shares was in the top 50 of private investors
Any questions people want asking I am more than happy to put them forward
whetstone was never really “in business” in the first place, was it?
so far as i can see, the underlying purpose of whetstone was simply
to dump shares from insiders who got shares when it was first set
up, onto gullible pis who had been encouraged to buy them through
a variety of social media channels, apparently including this board,
a blog, and at least one WhatsApp group. whetstone itself wasn’t
actually making anything, selling any services, inventing anything,
successfully identifying growth stocks or undervalued cash cows,
or adding any synergistic value to other companies through
its ‘expertise’. .. rather like WRN, the business of whetstone was
primarily to print and sell shares in itself onto retail pis. aimho.
it’s an interesting point what was ‘promised’ by whetstone itself
versus others. e.g were pis encouraged to believe that there was
someone other than the BoD who could speak on behalf of whet?
(which relates to the question, did whetstone have a shadow director?)
Was the meeting precipitated by the WHET complaint?
Should those of us who have registered a complaint expect such contact with the FSA?
EBITDA, one of the points to raise in your meeting concerns the role Mr Earley had in this saga.
At the time, he was banned from being a company director. One of the restrictions this imposes is that an individual cannot be involved in the running or promotion of a company. I guess the extent to which he was "promoting" WHET is a moot point and worthy of investigation.
It would also be interesting to unravel the identity of some of those characters on this page who were so blatantly misleading people...most of whom have disappeared into the ether.
Spikeyj....IMO it is about a fraud being committed. With WHET
many shares were given away, Aidan promised it would be a billion
pound Company, but importantly WHET never made such promises.
Like many Companies it looks like it is going out of Business...There was
nothing to stop Directors or their families selling shares, so from a legal
perspective what can they be seen to have done wrong? I do think
that WRN holders were sold a vision by Aidan, that was certainly
made convincing by the allocation of free shares, but I do not
think they could be accused of fraud. Don't get me wrong..I
do think WRN holders were played...but it looks to have
been a very clever game, and I would be surprised
if the FCA can find they have been fraudulent. With
regard to WRN that is much more complex.....that is
why I wondered if the FCA meeting was about WHET only.
manifesto, what makes you think that there were not
some relatively big fish involved with WRN/ whetstone?
[consider, for example, who put up the money for
GSC to pump-prime whetstone in the first place?
i doubt that it was allan who provided all the cash.]
bear in mind also, some folk might count as ‘big fish’ in the
FCA’s eyes not simply because of the size of any one game,
but because they’ve pulled the same stunts again & again.
Is your meeting about WHET only?
Look forward to your update, my concern is that they will only be interested in
chasing bigger fraudsters, but it would be great to be wrong!
I have a meeting with FCA this month over this disgraceful fraud and hopefully it goes forward to court proceedings that the FCA wish to bring against many people. I will let you know the outcome.
the unfortunate shareholders of Whet are not at all happy with this situation. If this is the case, have any of them attempted to contact the company to ask what's going on?