Member Info for dougb189

‘head firmly in the sand’

&bthat is then magnified, taking into account his previous track record.

‘.."When this initial payment arrives you can give us all a big fat apology. " - I think this is fair..’

It would be foolish to apologise to those who seek to stop discussion aimed at trying to find an answer to what has happened to the deposited $50M.

That $50M was deposited in account/s that Amit controls, since before the 2nd November 2023 and no matter how many falsehoods Amit then posts stating that distribution proceedings have started or that electronic notifications have started, there is then nothing occurring.

One might wish to remain in a vegetative state indeterminately, accepting ‘Final final..’ notices from Amit or one might consider getting proactive.

Should a payment suddenly appear now that a compliance process has been brought about, then Helx & his ilk should be apologising to all shareholders. But just Don’t hold your breath.

‘…. And your explanation for then being so far wide off the mark, is centred on your being *emotionally hand-cuffed* to remain positive, courtesy of the ‘shorts *abusive* behaviour’.

In way toooo deep bud.

& once again Helx you seem to be wide off the mark : your earlier knee-jerk reaction of ‘conspiracy theorists’ is inappropriate on a thread simply covering a probability of whether additional shares were being sold, post the closure of deals (v.v.small probability imv) which then qualifies as simply a supposition ; a ‘conspiracy’ then requiring sinister& powerful players which is then at total odds with the thread covering a probability of ‘cash flow problems’ & of Amit possibly struggling to pay for the latest wedding… so, hardly sinister &/or powerful.

And as per your “naysayer” assessment, again wide of the mark, when I have several times now posted that there is ‘a positive seen when considering that the Cloudtag website is still open’ and have several times suggested the supposition that Amit has been inappropriately using the funds to assist Shlomo. So hardly a naysayer, but just an active shareholder, who then finds employment (without sweating) in then forwarding Amit’s latest notices of ‘Final this’ & ‘Final that’..

But there again, you do have a track record of being wide off the mark and of then apologising to those shorting your… errors ? And your explanation for then being so far wide off the mark, is centred on your being swayed to remain positive, courtesy of the ‘shorts inappropriate behaviour’ ?? You need to chill bud and try get a grasp on reality. We will indeed likely get some form of payout, specifically that the $50M was reported as being deposited but I would suggest that you then prepare yourself that the ‘Health Care’ buyer of $229.5M of DaaP, might then not be all that it seems to be.

& expect quite a few more ‘’Final, final notices” or synonymous such posts, which you can then find matches your own rather vegetative state.

‘..Funny last few posts..’. And not quite as funny as :

“Final Licence Payment Update”

“Licence Payment Update - Final Information”

Making yourself look the fool again Helx.

‘.. Theoretically, there would be nothing to stop a private company ‘with cash flow problems’ offering shares..’

Amit sitting with $50M in his account since 2nd November 2023 and having then asked the buyer for DaaP to delay payment of the $225M during the same month, then ‘cash flow problems’ seems somewhat unlikely *

There is no proof (nor do I suspect there will ever be) that any shares were sold after the deals for SaaP & DaaP were announced, irrespective of what ‘Amitdoes..’ currently believes.

*unless the supposition that Shlomo has now somehow gotten hold of the funding then rings true.

Lol, yes indeed, the last 5 months have been somewhat monotonous.

For clarity for any sincere shareholders that are perhaps, understandably, getting overwhelmed with all the contradictory information getting posted here.

Contrary to what Whispering states :

Fact One. The SFO called me back, asking for further data.

Fact Two. The FOS emailed me back, also asking for further data.

There is then an external interest being taken in cloudtag proceedings.

Courtesy of those two facts, whether or not that interest shown is then significant or whether or not further action is being taken, then my interpretations (as per my posts of recent events) are then my opinions open for debate. But I draw the line at certain characters with a clear track history of obtuse and exceedingly monotonous argument..

“.. The ombudsman though now asking for further details…” which then ties in with my belief that Amit’s agent, the same company that sold off-market shares to Whispering, is then behaving against the shareholders interest (almost on a par with Whispering aka WakeyMitch’s rather self-centred posts) and it then remains to be seen by ‘early this week’ if Amit is once again fabricating reckless with the truth notices. Only this time, others are also reading.

“.. "The Company is pleased to advise shareholders that following an in depth review over recent weeks, the compliance process has now been approved by the regulator", which in reality holds as little weight as all the other utter inaccuracies and blatant untruths issued by CTAG over the years…”

An accurate assessment. The utter inaccuracies and blatant untruths, do though then follow a pattern.

One can then remove Amit’s superfluous vocabulary which is known to follow such pattern. You then end up with :

‘The Company is to advise shareholders that following a review, the compliance process from the regulator, is now being proceeded with..’

Are you suggesting Whispering, that the SFO are going to be phoning me every week ??

Your struggle with providing clear logical argument, whilst consistently going off at random tangents, then seems to affect your ability to read, or perhaps arises from.

To recap, one week ago I posted that I was expecting a response from the FOS. Now read again, and try concentrate on just the one specific, the FOS aka… the ombudsman, as per what I posted yesterday :

“.. The positive is as before, that the website is still open. That positive imo has then actually increased, in that the SFO and the regulator find nothing untoward in their preliminary enquiries, suggesting that the core of the cloudtag notices appear to be sound, ie. that company assets have been sold. The ombudsman though now asking for further details…”

‘.. some seem to think it reasonable.. that some regulatory authority has marked Amit's homework..’

With the latest Amit shenanigans of lost / unknown / missing contents to the share register, then it is also probable that some have taken this to task with the regulator. That ABH’s compliance might then cover sorting out the book.

Nowt to be “pleased” about, but certainly a step in the right direction ?!

And your desire for repetitive obtuse arguments, is somewhat sad.

As per all of ABH’s statements, his use of ‘regulator’ covers a fairly broad spectrum.

There has been suggestion, that this could be centred on the States.

As earlier, I’m still pleased that compliance with a regulator, then occurred 7 days after further information was passed to the SFO.

Initially you was ‘very specific’ & then was an ‘assertion’, but now is ‘speculate’

‘..nothing untoward found, suggesting that the core of activities was sound..’

A clear non-assertion then.

& a clear obtuse monotonously boring argument. Again.

Spikey, is that you naive and obtuse.. slow to get it together ?

Had there indeed been anything other than untoward ie. substantial,

then I could probably guess that I would likely be called in as a witness.

There is no assertion being made (other than your obtuse arguments) when the above is immediately followed by “..suggesting..”

Do try & behave, you sad old chap.

Could just as easily argue that you too Spikey are somewhat naive and it would again just be similarly as monotonously dull & boring.

There is no suggestion being made that an agency has found any evidence of wrongdoing.

That would not be a necessary requirement for ABH to then close the website.

My post suggested that if the deals were indeed a scam, that i would then expect the website to close, but i did not state that this was the action of any agency. That is yourself seeking such an argument. You sad old chap.

I simply suggest that imv it is a good positive for shareholders that the website is then still open.

& as per Whispering’s, the FCA could do so should they find reason, but that this would likely take many many months.

In the UK there are two regulators, the FCA & the PRA (Bank of England).

Compliance is the state of being in accordance with regulations.

The SFO are technically not regulators (but their recent introduction of DPA's, Deferred Prosecution Agreements, then has some external investigators suggesting that they have 'lowered' themselves to becoming regulators)..

“… The positive is as before, that the website is still open. That positive imo has then actually increased, in that the SFO and the regulator find nothing untoward in their preliminary enquiries, suggesting that the core of the cloudtag notices appear to be sound..”

As per the above, Spikey : the website imo would likely have been closed down and in addition, ABH would likely not continue with the notices, if as suggested, the deals were a sham.

"..zero independently verifiable evidence that any regulator is involved in any meaningful way.."

that is 100% correct Spikey.

Just extremely pleasing that after 7 weeks of radio silence from ABH,

that he then responds 7 days after a phone call from the SFO,

high-lighting his new-found compliance.