Member Info for buried_treasure

You didn't really answer the question so forgive me if I don't really answer yours.

The questions and answers were clearly tightly scripted and came across as very stilted. I think some of the predictions for the future are wildly optimistic in terms of quantum, value and timing and as such I do not find them credible.

I think those not already invested, who are the target for this kind of paid promotion, would be foolish to take those forecasts at face value and invest on that basis.

Given that you've already fallen for it I don't expect you to agree.

"It is far easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain

I might. If you first explain how a "company" can be "untruthful"?

We're different Zombi3.

I do feel strongly enough about it to post on any board they promote. Paid-for promotion should be declared in every interview so people came judge whether opinions subsequently given are objective or bought.

This should be as highly regulated as other forms of financial promotion. But seeing as London regulation is so light touch as to be almost unnoticeable I am happy to pick up the slack.

I predict this will age very badly howezap.

And you can rely on me to return to point it out.

A long form interview on The Sunday Roast is a big sell signal for me.

Paid promoters are parasites on the market. Those who are being paid to promote should be forced to declare it at the start of every interview because then everyone knows it is an opinion that has been bought, not formed independently.

They are takers from the market and add nothing to debate. Just a mouthpiece for poor performers, and in some cases outright wrong'uns. Who pays these grifters? The companies they promote. Who pays for that? The shareholders. YOU, HERE indirectly subsidise this drivel. Some actively amplify it!

Good companies do not need paid promoters to ramp their stocks. Good companies deliver profitable growth and let that do the talking for their share price.

IMHO any stock that pays for promotion is an immediate sell and avoid.

For financial masochists only.

I see you had a long form interview on The Sunday Roast this week. That's a big sell signal for me.

Paid promoters are parasites on the market. Those who are being paid to promote should be forced to declare it at the start of every interview because then everyone knows it is an opinion that has been bought, not formed independently.

They are takers from the market and add nothing to debate. Just a mouthpiece for poor performers, and in some cases outright wrong'uns. Who pays these grifters? The companies they promote. Who pays for that? The shareholders. YOU, HERE indirectly subsidise this drivel. Some actively amplify it!

Good companies do not need paid promoters to ramp their stocks. Good companies deliver profitable growth and let that do the talking for their share price.

IMHO any stock that pays for promotion is an immediate sell and avoid.

For financial masochists only.

Another pumpety-pump ramptastic interview from the paid promoters at Sunday Roast today.

There will be a discounted forward sold bucket shop special placing into any strength.

If you are out don't fall for it.

If you're in use that as your opportunity to get out.

Good ol' FlipFlopFrankie, eh? Lost £50K here and asks for my help in getting it back. Now he's buying back in. Priceless.

And soon to be penniless.

Ah, the good old days when Patterson visited Winnifrith personally and told him he was fully funded... only to do a placing the following week.

Meet the new boss / same as the old boss. Sing along everyone!

It's neither, you plank.

Post count six figures.

Of that, relevant? 6

All of this "Sath is a conman" stuff now, six months plus after the fact, is hilarious.

His record pre-BMV was all there in the public domain when he joined. It was in my first posts on this board, yet all I got was the most vitriolic abuse for posting facts about the type of person you had given your trust and money.

Someone (Sath?) said he was a crypto and banking expert and a serial value creating entrepreneur and none of you mugs, not one, bothered to do any due diligence on the guy.

Let that be a lesson to you.

The way some of you bought in a second, third and fourth time having sold out once is... frankly staggering.

When someone shows you who they truly are, believe them the first time.

Here endeth the lesson.

This probably isn’t the response the board expects from me but…..

I don’t see this filing as a big deal at all in itself. It hasn’t happened before, but the accounts have never been this late before.

Accounts for a public limited company are due at companies house six months after the accounting reference date, so 31 December for a period ending 30 June. There is a four month deadline for quoted PLCs not to have their shares suspended. Suspension was effected on 3 November as expected by anyone who understands these things, though probably came as a surprise to the mugs buying on Halloween.

That the accounts haven’t been filed 2 months after the deadline (28 February) generates an automatic proposal to strike off from the Registrar. It is their way of tidying up the register. It happens to hundreds of companies who are late with accounts or confirmation statements every month.

If the company’s lawyers are on the ball they will object to the striking off proposal on behalf of the company, acknowledging that the accounts are delayed but asserting they are definitely on the way. The strike off action will be suspended and then withdrawn when the accounts are finally filed.

Now if the accounts are not filed in a reasonable timeframe after the strike off action is suspended, or the company does nothing at all to get the action suspended, that IS a big deal. When a company is struck off and dissolved all its assets pass bona vacantia to the Crown.

Although quite what Brian would want with a ragbag of near-worthless expiring mining licences and 48% of a loss-making battery crushing shed in Wolverhampton is open to debate.

The winding up petition for BE DC CONNECT UK LIMITED will be heard in Court 30 at The Rolls Building at 1100 before Judge Agnello KC.

One of a job lot of 50 listed at the same time. 50 others are timed at 1030, another 50 at 1130.

This is a rubber stamping job. It doesn't look like its a process that will or even can be stopped.

Bye Sath [wave]

See you in court tomorrow, or are you giving the show a miss?

Sath, you really need to speak to your lawyers mate. Fast.

It would be CATASTROPHIC because the Group's bankers, auditors, insurers, suppliers, employees, landlord, leasing company, other creditors, customers start to look over their shoulder to see if the next domino is going to fall on them.

Also the Official Receiver will look into how the business was conducted and whether there was any shenanigans that could lead to the lifting of the corporate veil and give rise to personal liability for the officers. It will be an enormous distraction.

Insolvent High Court mandated liquidations are game over for the whole group.

You really need to take this more seriously. It is not just a legal process that can be easily contained.

Be in no doubt, the High Court ordering an insolvent winding up of one company in a group would have CATASTROPHIC effects on the rest of the group.

To pretend otherwise? Now THAT'S misinformation.

"Den" is Sath. Pass it on.

So "Den", when you said "The BE Company of the United Kingdom Ltd of which Sath is a director and is connected to BMV due to the share arrangements from previous RNS from BMV is not involved with this petition" that was a lie then.

And I told you what you "already knew" when posting facts.

Credibility zero.

TotalEnergies is a sham of a USD 200 billion company.

Right-o.

The HIGH COURT (not small claims) petition will be thrown out tomorrow then, if it hasn't been dealt with already.

Or maybe not.

We'll see.

"Misinformation"

The facts are all there.

You'd have to be blind as a mole not to see them.

OK "Den", simples.

According to the latest CS01 Confirmation Statement for BE DC CONNECT UK LIMITED (company number 05237920, the company that is respondent to the High Court petition) filed at Companies House on 3 October 2025, BE DC CONNECT UK LIMITED is a wholly owned subsidiary of THE BE COMPANY OF UNITED KINGDOM LIMITED.

You know, the BE COMPANY mentioned in the RNSs.

Any more questions?