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.
I do nightgaunt and if it turns out they are liable then by all means I will definitely forward to authorities but I cannot believe they would be that silly
I totally agree with Tesla on this, if the company cannot release an RNS on something as important the tax liability status then there is no way on hells earth I would trust an email from them.
Mind if anyone has an email stating they are no longer liable and they are I hope the proper authorities get a copy of it.
Tesla
Yes that’s thing why would they risk possibly having the 100 mill debt back on their plate mate doesn’t make sense ? Anyway time will tell . As I write share price almost back to what it was yesterday ...
Davide1
I think you are spot on and you should be able to trust what the company tells you, but when you read their RNS and it is filled with all the adjectives that CFQ highlighted and no signed, sealed or delivered statements then you have to wonder what they are doing.
I think that being suspicious of any ambiguous STA statements is the way forward as history shows........
If they are able to terminate the SPA surely that would mean that the written off debt would become payable and as in;payed earlier that would be like a turkey voting for Christmas, I cannot believe they would even risk that .......
Tesla
You’ll get no argument from me about what you’ve just posted agree with all . My only point was on the tax position and the 100 mill debt which is now solely with LO. Cheers Davide
Davide1
Fair enough, I have no issue with your position. However I believe this is a Chinese laundry operation so I see no point in contacting the company as they would never admit that. It is obvious to me that their rns are designed to inflate the sp so Gu can offload his salary shares via the back door.
I am referring to tomorrow’s RNS with the half year figures.
The list of failed potential investments, from this company, over the past 2-3 years is embarrassing, Enid Blyton would struggle to write better stories.........
Tesla
I’m not suggesting for one minute that they have run the Company well , what I am saying contact the Company and ask them about the tax liability and if you’re that confident about your knowledge of company law then challenge them and let us know who’s right or wrong . As sick as I am of how the company has managed things in the past I’m also sick of reading posts without people actually bothering to find out what the truth is .
I can only see one RNS ?
Is that a serious suggestion, you would prefer to believe a secretary over company law.
It is obvious they have a tax liabilty, if they didn’t they would RNS it. They’ve chosen to issue 2 rns rather than 1 to pump the sp today in typical STA fashion.
The previous ceo, who is on corruption charges in OZ sailed as close to the wind as possible, everyone knows nothing has changed.......
Tesla
Have you actually asked the Company that specific question ? If not then I suggest you do and then come
Back to us .
CFQ
do you think STA can pick and choose which parts of the SPA they can ignore, if they have terminated the agreement which I doubt they can do, they just can’t decide we don’t want that liabilty.
Let’s face it RANGE were never honest about their income or expenditure in RNS so emails are fair game to them, however today’s RNS is all jam tomorrow, their history shows they will just try and fleece investors.
The tax liabilty goes with the owner at the time of the transaction, that’s company law, there is nothing in any subsequent RNS to say it has been written off and judging by the porkies STA write in their releases if they could announce it without breaking the law they would.....they are still liable that is the bottom line
So who is telling porkies Davide1 or Tesla1?
Tesla
Incorrect I asked the company that specific question and below is their reply . So again tax issue NOT an issue
“ The debt has already been written off the termination of the SPA does not change this position “
Davide1
Sta are saying they have terminated the SPA agreement so they are liable
The Company Group has engaged new legal advisers (the "Advisers") to assist with this matter. The Advisers have now notified LandOcean that the Company Group has elected to terminate the SPA due to repudiatory breach by LandOcean, and is claiming various sums in excess of US$10.2 million.
When you do find a link, hoy it on the message board. Give us something to rant about.
It’s a different court so wont show on the same search.
Its the tax appeal court but I haven’t managed to find any links.
This company won’t want any bad news surfacing whilst they are trying to offload Gu’s salary shares
There is NOOOOOOOO tax liability !! This was all transferred to LO as part of the Sale Process . Email the Company and they will confirm it , end of .
"However strangely they forget to mention the $4.9m tax liabilty court case......"
You got any links to court proceedings for this. Been having a dig around myself and can only see Claim No. CV2017-02379 on the Trinidad Court Case website?
http://webopac.ttlawcourts.org/LibraryJud/Judgments/HC/mohammed_r/2017/cv_17_02379DD11feb2021.pdf
It got thrown out, by the looks of it.
"I therefore rule that the failure by Ms. Mah*** to comply with section 51(1) LPAis detrimental to her Claim and leads to a nullification of her suit. "
Date of Delivery: Thursday 11 February 2021
Sent link in earlier post
I don't think we have had one post defending it today. from what I can gather.
It certainly is an odd share board when people only post when the price rises based on thin air.
Nothing has changed here, still no business or revenue stream and still people fall for it or try to defend it, unbelievable!
100% correct
correct
Steady have you seen the share price over the past 10 years?
How could anyone post anything other than negatively........
Genuine question.....
Because it’s a con and they have been doing this for over a decade under a former name.
The spread yesterday was almost 50% no one makes any money except those in the know who bought this week when they artificially dropped the offer and someone bought in knowing this was going to be released today.
The company is bankrupt and is a lifestyle company for a few Chinese individuals.
Nothing in today’s announcement is new and it’s all jam tomorrow, so it doesn’t justify an initial 50% rise but investors see the silly sums banded around and think they might make a quick buck.
The arbitration figure is a joke, the company they are in dispute with wiped out a 9 figure debt for a worthless Trinidad oil company that had been losing money for decades.........
It is all a con........
This has got to be the oddest bb I've ever read. Why do a few individuals constantly run this share down? Surely you would spend your time more wisely. Very odd.
Just passing through - how does a "shocker of the RNS" generate a +30% jump in share price? I wish the companies in my PF would issue a shocker every now and then if this is the result...