Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. 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.
Not a level playing field.
can .
Agreed RK
The Intricacy of company law ca be perplexing and downright unfair , far too oft .
Best of
Thankyou Rkb for that post it's quite clear aim is very broken and involves not just the listed company's but all attached Inc nomads, pr etc
Until a decent system can be put in place and police these bent players this corruption will carry on
Clarification
I have been in communication with the Company and they would like me to clarify TR1’s.
I should not have posted on Wednesday 13:37 “I am at a loss as to how ForCrowd can cross a percentage threshold and not TR1.”
Quote “The simple answer is that ForCrowd is not a UK regulated company and therefore isn’t under any obligation to file a TR1. I would be surprised if they even knew what one was.
More importantly, it is not an AIM company’s responsibility to chase their shareholders to ask them to submit a TR1.
The system is in place to ensure that institutional investors (ie fund managers) disclose their holdings on a share register especially if they go through certain percentage thresholds starting at 3%.
The rise of PIs as major shareholders in AIM companies should I believe warrant a change in the rules, but until such time as non-regulated investors are compelled to issue TR1s, then the system will remain flawed and “situations” (as you believe Clear Leisure has created) will continue to exist.
You also mention Vidacos Nominees. This company, as it’s name suggests, is a nominee company and, unless they have one single customer holding over 3% in Clear Leisure, they will not issue a TR1.
I’m sure I haven’t told you anything you don’t already know, but the City is a complex place for people who have never worked in it, and I thought this was worth explaining.
I would be happy to post this on lse so all our shareholders who read the page will understand how TR1s work and will see that nothing untoward is taking place.” End quote.
Obviously I should have done some more homework on TR1’s but I think I was distracted a little (two weeks ago)
RKB
PS It is coincidental that I have Posted this two weeks after we received the speeding ticket and it is also coincidental that the speeding ticket RNS does not show on LSE South East.