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.
Isn’t RYAN 2007 a newly motivated little wasp. Hmmmm makes you wonder. Member since 2020 but just now motivated to sting? Just like a window Ryan, we can see through you
It’s as if the judge just rocked up knowing absolutely nothing about the case and just saying yes that’s fine , surely if he’d done even the slightest bit of research on the case he would have said hang on a minute there’s something not quite right here, let’s take another look before we approve it
What I’m saying is you said it was big week and reason to be hopeful but haven’t said why, the hearing was a chance to stop this but you are trying to portray that it couldn’t be challenged and the judge couldn’t overturn it, then you say it can’t be appealed but that issue comes into play after the judgement so why did the judge not take the respondants (bp) issues into account before making his final judgement ?
RodneyT, when you mention Michael Cotter's legal challenge are you talking about the current legal proceedings or a long winded case against the perpetrators?
Are you saying that the Hearing was irregular Ryan? On what basis would you come to that opinion?
Your words not mine Ryan. This week is the start of Michael Cotter's legal challenge.
Your words not mine Ryan. This week is the start of Michael Cotter's legal challenge.
I am not a legal professional but my opinion is that this would be addressed via separate legal proceedings against those concerned and/or free proceedings more generally I.e. not a challenge to this judgement.
I’m still interested to know if one of our sleuths can determine whether there are social connections between the judiciary and the Calgary COPL team as I suspect this railroading through the system without challenge was predetermined over a glass of wine….
‘1. None of us know what Summit intend to do once they own COPL's assets. There is reason to believe that Summit are keen to protect their business' excellent reputation and the confidence of investors. ‘
Rodney what does this even mean, plus you haven’t answered my previous question, you said you were at the hearing and previous to that you said it was a big week but seem fine that the judge approved the AVO and that it was proper ?
Flogging a dead horse I know, but if the information provided to the judge for him to make his decision on was later found to be, incorrect, flawed and or misleading then the basis for his decision is undermined and can be overturned…..
To approve the implementation proposal subject to due process.
I was attended the Hearing via Webex and Mr Justice Yamauchi stated towards the end that there is no right of appeal. What else do you expect me to say other than recommend you address him directly via the Court's Clerk? You should be able to obtain the contact details via the Calgary Court website.
1. None of us know what Summit intend to do once they own COPL's assets. There is reason to believe that Summit are keen to protect their business' excellent reputation and the confidence of investors.
2. Michael Cotter will be starting his legal campaign this week and already has a significant amount of evidence which is increasing regularly. As you know, Michael Cotter is an experienced and talented financial services solicitor.
Personally, I am content that progress is being made.
Look like LSE / FCA and NOMAD are also complicit in this Fraud, and should have stop any sale until the asset is independently valued? as the first thing that sticks out in that link i posted below, is'' Market abuse /
Short selling / Misleading statements'' that all happen at COPL we have proof in official RNS statement, which is the most serious of all, the police fraud squad should have been alerted by the relevant bodies that seek to protect shareholders interest, it should have been investigated'' been that shareholders have be posting and banging on about it at least 6 month before suspension / board members stepping down like fly's, and ultimately CCAA to run and hide..
I mean what's the point making up rules for all company listed on the stock Market, and don't look into it when there is discord and distrust about bond fraud on the BB ? but you try and write the f word on here,and see how quickly it's filtered out, within seconds LOL!! i ask this question to LSE'' is swearing more important to stamp out than fraud ???
WE NEED ANSWERS...
Rodney last week you said it wasn’t over and was a big week and you had realistic reasons to be hopeful, now you’re saying,
‘What power do you think that BP and Mr Pontin had in Mr Justice Yamauchi's Court to force him to change his judgement Ryan? There is no right of appeal. This is all due process and is a legal system developed over hundreds of years. It is proper.’
So what were you hopeful about, as far as I was concerned it was a big week because the AVO still had to approved, were you hopeful about something else ?
Https://docs.londonstockexchange.com/sites/default/files/documents/aim-landscape-infographic.pdf
perhaps he can look into this link and see how many rules was broken going forward in this case
regards
So the average loss is £25k - so circa £11m in total 🤔
Hopefully these scum bags will pay up out of court for the above.
But what about the £k's each of us would have made if the company was not destroyed? probably at least x10 per person,
So are we looking at claiming compensation for actual losses + potential future losses 🤔😮
Stas, no not you, you are one of the good guys as most are on here. Everyone is entitled to be positive or negative in any share but you always get the odd one (you can spot them a mile away) who is in it just for themselves no matter what and I suspect some were even paid.
As for myself, I was very negative ever since the CUDA acquisition and especially the Anavio death spiral funding which effectively killed the company, there were so many red flags it was unbelievable and I did try and point them out to people but got consistently shouted down, called a troll, shorter, you name it, some sad individuals even followed me to other forums, they also had posts removed, unfortunately I have since been proved correct.
What I dislike most of all are directors/companies/money men/etc who lie openly and defraud innocent pi's all of whom are just trying to earn a bit of money for themselves or their family only for it to be taken away by the greed of these b4stards, so I'm all for the Class Action to nail them and for pi's to recover their losses.
The one thing that really annoys me though is that if Art had funded everything via shareholders (Primary Bid) and had nothing to do with Anavio the company would be in a very healthy position right now with the SP probably close to 100p but greed got the better of him and this is the result.
Rodney, There was a warning from the court on the April 17th document stating that the respondent must file an affidavit and other documents before the application is to be heard or considered, which bp did. Key point being ‘ before the application is to be heard or considered’ so surely that means that the judge could put a hold on this if he thought the information in the affidavit needed to be checked first, so your statement that this was all due process doesn’t make sense
Antha, not sure if that's directed at me, it could well be based on past assertions, but I'll give my penny's worth anyway as I have all heard all the rubbish about rampers, bottom line, I don't recall, other than the odd occasion anyone saying anything other than was told to us by the company, indeed I was initially accused of ramping but than after having realised the fraud and dishonest nature of Millholland and thus voiced those opinions, I was then called out for de-ramping.
Having now in some eyes been a ramper AND a deramper, next I'm obviously accused of being a position poster, Lol, Personally, I don't give a hoot about all these conspiracy theorists, its water of a ducks back to me, particularly when most, if not all are just bitter people that either lost through listening and acting on narrative of rampers or, didn't win due to listening to narrative of de-rampers. Whereas in fact what they generally all have in common is, by just not doing their own research, their only recourse is to then get bitter at others due to their own laziness. No one is forced to buy or sell and if you do your own proper research then your decision is yours and yours alone, if you follow blindly someone else, well guess what!
However, what has happened here is totally outside the realms of rampers, derampers or even to those having done your own research, what you have here is a clear case of fraud and as such it is the company, the directors and the actors they brought in, such as Anavio that will be the subject of scrutiny.
I have no interest or time for the chasing of individual alias's, for petes sake if we had listened to the derampers, none of us would even be here, but then nor would COPL have even existed, if their had been no PI then their could not have been an anavio. Let the conspiracy theorists continue if they wish, I have better things to concentrate on here and that is an impending case where the real guilty are going to be forced to pay a heavy and very, very public price.
Rodney, So what was the point of the hearing then ? And insisting that the respondent was there ? What was the point ?
I would also seriously look into all those who were paid or otherwise to post on social media to affect the SP and drive the ramping, after all a lot pi's are now trapped by these individuals, some of whom are still here and seemed to have completely forgotten the role that they've played.
As you say "Take their houses too".
No chance. I believe Summit will build it up first and take a massive drink out of this. No point going through all this legal action with Kravitz et al for a small gain.
BP are done, Anavio are done. Long live Summit.
Over to MC and prison cells for Anavio and friends.
Good point Duster! 👍
That is probably what will happen, BP will buy it relatively cheaply from Summit. Everyone’s a winner (except us)