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.
ValJu- with respect he has not worked tirelessly ‘for all shareholders’ . He has worked tirelessly for those shareholders who expressed support for the NO campaign. No problem with that. But he is not speaking for all shareholders. Let’s me clear about that. To suggest what you and Fred have stated it is a significant exaggeration.
We are where we are as they say. The NO vote won the day and its over to the BOD to respond and I would agree but I would advise individual shareholders ( if they need advice and I’m sure not) to be independent and not rely on dubious information.
There would appear to be an opaqueness about the message from the EGM. We got more from the RNS than we got from the Action Group.
Interesting?
Thanks for the reply Valju. Understood.
BB apologies just seen your email?
Every email sent to me to start with, was forwarded as stated
Can only assume (rightly or wrongly) that sheer numbers swamped poor ole Fred!
But many who sent support, stated they didnt want group cc emails, so others could not see their comments?
As promised Fred had to send out individual emails to stick to their wishes?
So, the correspondence between him et al might have gone a little sku whiff as many emailed frequently as opposed to those who emailed once or twice?
Maybe these requests were deliberate maybe not, but it slowed & congested whole process.
However, it did get required result! So, by sticking to his word, he kept everyones faith as well as their privacy!
Not a perfect answer, but if you had a reply, you will have his direct email & mob, so perhaps you could ask again?
As I am purely the email forward service, & have to wait in line for updates, same as et al, unless I call him & ask specifics!
He has never imo, omitted anyone deliberately, and again imo has worked tirelessly for the benefit of all holders! Despite what some might say!
And if Satu is conversing direct, he must also have her attention & respect, otherwise why bother!
Finally if the reason given for non attendance if fact, then imo she did what anyone would of, and should be allowed the opportunity to put forward a response to the NO vote!
What I find unforgivable, is George not attending such an important meeting either!
One should have made the effort, whilst the other helped the wounded person.
All imo and I am like you hoping for the response, asap so we can reconsider ?
SuperLoony 100 back. Buy TYM and EUU!!! My masters pay me good.
Hi Bridgedoggi
I would advise that you don’t rely on this so called Action Group to provide either operational or strategic direction. Investing is a personal decision and can’t be left to a diverse group of varying personalities egos intents et al.
Personally, I would suggest you make your own decision as to stay with VAL. In addition , you can communicate directly with the company. I am.
I have drawn their attention to the fact that they must communicate with all shareholders at the same time and not with a ‘select few’ with exaggerated ideas of (a) their intellect (b) their monopoly on wisdom (c) their egotistical and arrogant opposition to opinions contrary to their own.
So I’ve seen some postings here - quite a few - that don’t blindly accept the statements and actions of this so called action group.
The YES vote list this time and the NO group may have got their Pyrrhic victory. But it’s up to the company now to deliver and I would agree with the Action Group in this regard- let’s see what the response is.
But don’t expect miracles from Action Groups. They may achieve something - but mindful of the saying” the only thing worse than not getting what you want is GETTING what you want.
Anyway each to their own. TYM and EUA have done wonders for me. So out of the ashes here could come triumph- but it’s an individual personal triumph- you would be foolish to rely on an ‘elite’ collective.
Anyway best regards
Bridgedogg1 - Short term investor/trader. Look at the history mate. The damage to LT shareholders. Don’t sprout that bull****. Sell up with your loss and move on before you lose more.
Valju - “opted for non group emails”? Lost me there. I never saw that option and have heard nothing since the much earlier original group email? Just the one.
Hello cjc
All emails would have come through me originally, to be forwarded to Fred?
Unless an avatar is attached to the email, Freddie or I may not know who you are on here?
In addition, most group members opted for NON group emails, so if one or two have been "lost in translation" it is entirely possible, you have not had latest updates?
But, NO the action group is not liaising directly with the BoD since putting their questions and points of view over to them yesterday. Only Fred is in communication, as I understand it, with Satu?
The group, like you, is awaiting a response to the situation of the no vote
As yet nothing has been forth coming otherwise Im sure Fred would have advised us?
AND YES YOU ARE RIGHT, WE MUST NOT TURN ON EACH OTHER, BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING TO ARGUE ABOUT IS THERE? Although I am sure some, would like this, for whatever reason?
imo
The 'action group' have no positive info to share, if they did it would be all over here because they are invested. Hence they turned u, vote wasn't passed, did their little speech and went home. Outcome - company has no cash. Hope you are pleased with yourselves, got your little say didn't you? After all this time the shareholders who have been banging on about what the BOD should do. So you organise, get a bit of power, and wham - shut the company down in 5 mins. Yeh, you lot should be dictating what the BOD should do, that turned out well.
I am a LTH in Valirx, in fact I can even remember when it was just myself and one other who used to attend AGM's travelling from Manchester. I have been following the threads on here and don't recall seeing an invite from the 'Action Group'??? Please can someone advise me 'politely' without any inference as to my locational intent on the day of the recent meeting. It would be helpful if the 'Action Group' who are talking to the BOD??? can let all SH's know what is being discussed. Apologies in advance if some areas of this posting may not be correct but now is the time for constructive clarity. Regards to all.