Member Info for Chaebol

How did your 12000th green box riddle go? because I laugh at you daily and some others , You and Aerry 'push the envelope' masterclass idiots..... unreal tbh.

anyway........... You should learn by now when you say youre sure of something, you should then do the complete opposite x;)

I live in the real world Ray knowing that you cantnt own 120 -150million shares in GST a crappy penny stock on LSE without TR1's

Thats just the reality, but thats clearly not here on these boards.

Well its like you fact checkers telling me what I say is partially true but mostly incorrect lol

But you never actually tell me what your theory is just chaebols wrong every single time. And I will be wrong sometimes, just like everyone else has here, massive labyrinth to unravel here and its not simple to verify much from the BOD so we have to guess, but thankfully my guesses here have been a lot better than yours Ray.

Come on Ray lets swap!

Thats exactly what I said Enki, CDS lively again today....

Daphane Chong (SUM 1211/2026)

As a former manager who was not a signatory to the SPA, she has no arbitration rights. She cannot ask the court to send the matter to arbitration. Her filing is therefore a simpler, general application for a stay of proceedings against her — essentially asking the court to pause the case against her while the main dispute is resolved elsewhere.Bottom LineThe separate filings and differing wording are consistent with each defendant playing to their own legal strengths:Sellers → leveraging the existing arbitration.

No i replied to it, happy to share all my trades with you the whole lot but need to see your top ups at .2 .3 and .5 x;)

Said swap. Remember? I know your memory is poor.

What is also confirmed is that by zheng zhu and chong filing the stay they have still not filed a defence in the court as that would elimnate the ability to go back to arbitration

Accurate Legal Position in Singapore

By filing the stay applications (SUM 1210/2026 and SUM 1211/2026) instead of filing their Defence, the defendants (Zheng/Zhu sellers and Chong) have preserved their position to argue for a return to arbitration (or a stay in favour of arbitration).

Lol my ai says your ai says now its ai v chaebol

run the below through your chaebol derangement ai programme and then show me the not necessarily true parts lol

Its far more likely the sellers go back to arb than anything else. Chong even backing it and showing she is working with zhengzhu by filing stay also

Why the Two Separate Stay Filings in the GST/Semnet Case MatterPost:All parties will be in court on Thursday.Two separate stay applications have been filed in HC/OC 143/2026:SUM 1210/2026 (Choo Seet EE & Zheng Kang Wen Mervyn) → “Summons for Stay of the Whole Action (Others)”

SUM 1211/2026 (Daphane Chong) → “Summons for Stay of Proceedings”

Why Two Separate Filings With Different Wording?

This is deliberate and revealing.Under the Rules of Court 2021, multiple defendants can file a single joint summons. In fact, if the main purpose was simply to seek a stay pending settlement, it would have been normal and more efficient to file one combined application showing a united front.

Instead, they filed separately with materially different wording. This strongly suggests they are not primarily running a unified “stay to settle” application.

Different Legal Positions = Different Filings.

The Two Sellers (SUM 1210/2026)

They are bound by the arbitration clause in the Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA). GST/Semnet issued a Notice of Arbitration against them in July 2025 — months before the High Court action was filed.Because a third party (Chong) is also named in the court suit, they cannot obtain a clean statutory stay under Section 6 of the International Arbitration Act for the whole action. They are therefore asking the court to exercise its inherent case management powers via the broader “(Others)” category. This is a discretionary stay aimed at pausing the entire High Court case in favour of (or pending) the earlier arbitration.

Daphane Chong (SUM 1211/2026)

As a former manager who was not a signatory to the SPA, she has no arbitration rights. She cannot ask the court to send the matter to arbitration. Her filing is therefore a simpler, general application for a stay of proceedings against her — essentially asking the court to pause the case against her while the main dispute is resolved elsewhere.Bottom LineThe separate filings and differing wording are consistent with each defendant playing to their own legal strengths:Sellers → leveraging the existing arbitration.

Chong → seeking a general protective stay.

While settlement could still be a secondary objective, the structure of these applications looks far more like a tactical case management / arbitration prioritisation strategy than a straightforward “stay pending settlement”.

Https://www.judiciary.gov.sg/hearing-list/hearing-list-details/ds-1-669341

https://www.judiciary.gov.sg/hearing-list/hearing-list-details/ds-1-669343

They could have easily filed one single joint filing if the remedy was settlement, but they chose not to, and that choice is deliberate and meaningful.

Legal Position in Singapore

Under the Rules of Court 2021, multiple defendants are allowed to file a joint summons / joint application for a stays settlements etc.

Why waste money on separate filings if this is about settling

The Two Sellers (Choo Seet EE / Zheng Kang Wen Mervyn) – SUM 1210/2026


Wording: “Summons for Stay of the Whole Action (Others)” They are bound by the SPA arbitration clause. Their strongest argument is to pause the entire court case because there is already arbitration (started July 2025). However, because the court case also includes Chong (a third party), they cannot use a clean statutory arbitration stay. So they use the broader discretionary case management stay under its general powers hence the “(Others)” category —. It’s intentionally wider because they want the whole action paused.

Daphane Chong – SUM 1211/2026
Wording: “Summons for Stay of Proceedings” She is not a party to the SPA and has no arbitration clause to rely on. She cannot argue “send this to arbitration”. So she files a simpler, cleaner application for a general stay of the proceedings against her. She is basically saying: “Pause everything against me while the main fight between Semnet/GST and the sellers is resolved elsewhere.”

Why Not File Identically?

Because their legal rights are not the same.

If settlement was the main goal, the filings would likely be much more similar (or even one joint filing). The fact they are worded differently shows they are each playing to their own strengths

Sellers → leveraging the arbitration angle (via case management).

Chong → asking for a general protective stay because she has no arbitration rights.

And about 93 sints lol

twelve of the best 4 p trades I have ever seen, hit right after large sells amazing, but its not being manipulated boys x;)

and 21 trades over 1k

and 51 trades over 100 pound

I see manipulation, I hear manipulation, Can even feel manipulation, but of course its not being manipulated

I have already answered it you even answered it for me in writing and still you persist, it really is a special form of stupid going on now, I think youre gonna ask again as well. x;)

Nice to hear Wulf been a solid safe gainer all the way woithout all the up downs of other miners. Great call that Prager is a Wulf and you need to be running that game, fair play to him, given excellent value to shareholders that backed him, win-win.

Keeping my sound, like you say Dags its one that will just rise one of those days and you take your 20 and say thank you. GL

Nice to hear Wulf been a solid safe gainer all the way woithout all the up downs of other miners. Great call that Prager is a Wulf and you need to be running that game, fair play to him, given excellent value to shareholders that backed him, win-win.

Keeping my sound, like you say Dags its one that will just rise one of those days and you take your 20 and say thank you. GL

No i dont bfd theyve lost bake GS fintech its whole crypto arm which i predicted many months ago, they then pivoted to the worst jurisdiction in the EU Poland lol that confirmed how unserious GST is in this.

So no I was saying 0.2 many months ago and my thinkning and targets was based on GST failing which it did, let alone the EMI rubbish with Angra and Semnet etc.

This is where it should be or back to 0.2p, more bad news needs to be explained and when are they going to explain it?

BFD x2

Chaebol

Posted in: GST

Posts: 12,356

ESMA Comms December 202528 Mar 2026 14:00

Https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2025-12/ESMA75-113276571-1631_Statement_on_end_of_MiCA_transitional_periods.pdf

Cyprus was the 27th February deadline for VASPS, I would imagine many took their lead from the French AMF, LT obviously closed nearly 3 months ago and Poland has no MiCA guidance to offer Polish VASPS at this time.

Yes clearly im lying or like oyu said when you didnt see chongs filing for the stay and accused me of all sorts, maybe you just didnt read it huh?

Its clear English for you this is the second time ive had tt relink this, if youre going to accuse me of lying then prove it with receipts you odious little man.

People cant accept the truth here Ian.

The last 2 trading days have been manipulated madness. That people dont see it that way tells me the agenda they have Ian, we going back to arbitration end of this week, another part I was told that was finished and when I dared to say that the first thing Zheng and Zhu will do is file a section 6 to saty it back to arbitration I was told by the bfd the leews the bills they had been involved in arbitration before and what I was saying was nonsensical fud.

Stay hearing 230pm 14th May.

They dont like logic here and and worst of all the truth.

Stocks aging and de-aging you.

That cant be a good place mass x

Theyve gotta keep it at a certain price chef for the raise AIMHO.

Doom loop news soon surely?

You didnt say France ive already reposted where i actually showed France in the original message but you do you bfd

'So there is nothing in your AI that supports Kat's contention that they had to shut down now or they would be heavily fined Chaebol.

Vasp's in Poland can continue to operate until the end of June across the EU and afterwards in Poland until their application is completed one way or the other.'

You siad that and its blatantly incorrect, No other VASP in Poland with a Polish Vasp has done what bake did, happy to be proven wrong, but every vasp serving customers in Poland that ive checked, dont have the bake loophole.... but bake committed unauthorised trades gonna come back and bite let alone going back to arbitration the end of the week or even the 4p trades propping up the price today or even the raise coming in at .2p

So much to look forward to here......... Im back to the 25th March thats all and its going oh so much lower.

Oh my aching ribs, bill have you looked into where you can get rib transplants yet.....

How do they reapply enki? with all those unauthorised trades.

Death spike and loads clearing the decks with big sells again and pure panto keeping the price up, theres mayhem coming.

Enki, how did bake utilise cross border services wihtout breaking the rules.

If they did it through the polish vasp they broke the rules right ?. and thats the end of bake...... I think you know this ?