Member Info for Bfdinvestor

Kat you are definitely protesting too much and just digging a deeper and deeper hole.

Personally I don't think a couple of suppliers having a whine is worthy of an RNS

To add to things they should have communicated but haven't

The PLT label has just been brought back today.

Cheers fed.

Ah, so it's two UK based suppliers having a whine.

One of whom says it has been going on for years. Big companies always shaft small firms over payments sadly.

An engineering firm I know has just been screwed over by a PLC and is now in admin because of delayed payment

Really lol

Then please explain how "retailers" would have picked them up lol

You were absolutely talking about the treasury shares

Kat why would there ever have been an RNS for the treasury shares

They were 58m shares split two ways, so nowhere near enough to trigger a TR1.

Why do you keep posting this nonsense

Billy you are right, he/she is just determined to carry on irrespective of how stupid they make themselves look

Reardon can you copy the article please

I've no wish to join Drapers !

No reason why they can't communicate these deals in news RNS kachrafilter and they should be doing so.

All they are doing is leaving an open goal for shorts to exploit.

Have to hand it to them, nearly a 10% drop on no news and a very few million shares traded is mega efficient.

Just think what would happen if there was a liquidity gap on good news

Have I disappeared King5hott?

When did I tell anyone it had turned a corner.

I recall asking you why you were insulting somebody else for suggesting it may have done when it had risen 20% from the low.

I guess that is the problem with trolls like you, too thick to keep up with your own lies.

Sandgrounded how could they take the profits once legal ownership had passed to GST?

That wouldn't be arbitration, that would be theft.

You really need to give this one up

Sandgrounded I'm not sure why you are trying to post a different irrelevance each time.

If the two previous owners believed they were entitled to anything else from the contract then they would have commenced the arbitration.

What you are suggesting has nothing to do with the difference between non complete and non compete.

It's a simple statement of fact that the sale completed on a set date, at which point GST took ownership and profit. That is just how commercial law works

If GST had not paid the shares, would the previous owners have a claim to Semnet? That is part of the question. The other part would be who does the profit belong to until the contract is completed?

Sandgrounded, rather than posting this kind of rubbish, why not go and check the total voting rights RNS, where you will see that GST now have less than 2m shares held in Treasury.

The other 58m were used to COMPLETE the Semnet acquisition

It really isn't that difficult

Sandgrounded there is a difference between things where different opinions are valid and things that are just objectively legal statements

The fact that GST has legally acquired and paid for. 66% ownership of Semnet is one such.

That isn't a case of anybody trying to denigrate anybody else. It's a case of simple fact. Unless, ofcourse, you are saying the RNS history is a lie?

It's plain stupid Leew.

We transferred shares over to complete the transaction many months ago, we have quoted Semnet in our interims, the remaining Semnet director is now one of largest shareholders and these idiots are trying to imply the sale is dodgy

Based on nothing more than a dodgy AI definition that usually refers to a clause within a contract.

It's beyond stupid

Why is anybody giving this nonsense airtime.

The sale has been completed, monies have been paid over.

So this isn't a case of any waffle clause.

There are no other third parties involved in the arbitration.

So not sure what the ADog is trying to claim

Look at today, for example, nearly 7% down on 2.5m shares traded.

Imagine the liquidity gap on better news, remembering that this has done 70m shares in a day before

Kachrafilter for once I totally agree with you about the comms

Finley clearly gets online and is doing more than Lyttle managed in 5 years.

However the Comms is appalling and I'd guess it's down to his inexperience as a CEO.

It needs to get better and quick

Where I'm not so sure you are correct is the sp effect of better news.

I very much doubt if an sp rise would be limited to 10%

Strange we are making these great new partnerships when apparently, according to the trolls, we are days away from admin!

Billy from memory the 136 was money transferred but the margin was only a fraction of that