Member Info for dougb189

Anything is possible in this game bud. IF things do go well here, we are looking at a further shares rinse.

Not sure which mouth would be the most vulgar:

with TW you simply stand back a meter and then take note of his counsel.

With ABH you will then immediately ask for a second opinion. Both need rinsing with carbolics.

Lol but i have to ask bud, were you a COPL shareholder?

Your argument (albeit a lot lot more coherent than those coming from the whine o’clock club) is very reminiscent of COPL bb’s ‘death throes’ arguments : Put simply, they ignored every one of his warnings and went even further, suggesting the man was.. well, a complete loony.

Then after the fires had extinguished such that only scant evidence was being procured, they then all amusingly squealed ‘send for Tom.. where’s Tom?’ !! [i kid you not, unbelievably this actually happened].

The prospect of Tom entering a burnt out building which some might argue, he had set on fire (figuratively) would be quite silly, on a par say with arguing with a drunkard ??

But.. perhaps though helps explain why ABH keeps sending out those nonsensical updates…. Darn. You might actually be on to something there bud.

Nonetheless, he is seriously rattled about any association with his reputation & that ‘3rd party’ :

“..For the avoidance of doubt, I will also not hesitate to take any action necessary to protect my reputation against the serious harm that would be caused by the making of false and defamatory allegations to third parties…”

With the latest excuse for non-payment of the debt owed [income or dividend] now being centred on new-found ‘book discrepancies’,

It then opens up a wonderful new line of enquiries into the FCA vetting processes.

Of how an alleged responsible person of a UK company eg SB Corporate Financial., can then be accredited as a Money Laundering Reporting officer, ie. a person competent in assessing external in-direct probabilities, when that person can clearly not keep clean records of internal directly owned, company issued shares.

No wonder, Shlomo is now threatening legal action with those who attempt to associate him with this debacle.

Courtesy of the twitter crew, it is Interesting that Shlomo now states :

‘to protect my reputation against the serious harm that would be caused by the making of false and defamatory allegations to third parties’

which can be interpreted as stating that Shlomo now believes there could be serious harm to his reputation with it being alleged that he has association with Amit Ben Haim ?

And now we have their previous ‘partnership’ being removed from ABH’s bio.

Suspecting that the only notifications that we will see of any value, will be those coming from Shlomo Ben Haim.

‘.. and once the Paying Agent has concluded its work, notifications will commence…’

Alt.syn: ‘the cheque is in the post’

which will no doubt once again placate the toothless.

There’s a loose guideline from the SFO that they will only look at cases ‘involving 10’s of millions of £’s’ and so it could then be that the c.£9M that the Pi’s spent, does not meet their criteria, for those that believed the Onitor phase was a scam (extremely difficult to prove) and used this as core to any complaint.

The 2nd phase then saw an alleged SaaP & DaaP deal arising off the algorithms that Onitor used (from 7 years ago) and with this, there are then ctag notices pertaining to $50M having been deposited & which are supported by the monthly updates of ‘the cheques are in the post’.

This too likely fails to meet the SFO criteria for a ‘serious or complex fraud’ with any possible non-payments of dividends / income, then being relegated to either a civil court claim for a fraud claim centred on tort of deceit (balance of probabilities) or via criminal court (beyond reasonable doubt).

As it currently stands, there exists a very high probability that the next ABH notice will again correlate to ‘the cheque is in the post’.

Lol, but not quite bud, more the ‘wee shuggie’ with a healthy mix of the Black Douglas (wolf of Badenoch) when he then finds a bee in his bonnet.

IF you take anything from tonight, then take ‘the debt owed’ and its legal standing.

Tony T., per your ‘ahead of the curve’ which then sees you as the most recent shareholder to raise your concern to the SFO. In other words, right at the very back of the curve.

And what you then spectacularly miss is the subsequent posts questioning the integrity of the SFO senior managers, past & present.

A “keyboard warrior” indeed.

Raises the question as to what offends you the most : Pi’s posting their opinions or Pi’s finding fault with ABH ?

The SFO chair, has likely not improved.. it is now the ex chief constable of the local home county, who has taken on the role. Apparently a 3% success rate for solving burglaries is considered sufficient.

You so very quickly revert to nonsense. Or a sharper man than myself might consider the cat has got her claws out ?

The subject was centred on your opinion that SFO had effectively signed off ABH with ‘no evidence of fraud’.

I highlighted Tony T’s shallow depth of understanding and his likely shallow request of the SFO.

The two issues are related.

Given that Trombone implies that he is the only sincere investor on this bb and that the rest of us who enquired of the SFO are nothing more than keyboard warriors, then it doesn’t take too much reasoning to work out the depth of detail that he likely supplied to the SFO. “Dear chaps, there are some keyboard warriors suggesting that Amit Ben Haim is a smoke & mirrors sky-fairy. Could you look into. T xxx “

How long to sort out anomalies ? Good question.

I’d disagree. It lends itself yet further to the ongoing deceit which could be summarised by a slight change in the syntax on all of ABH’s notices, to then simply read as “the cheque is in the post” :

1st June 2023 ABH: ‘we expect the fund distribution process to be fulfilled within 4 weeks..’ correlates to ‘the cheques get posted in 4 weeks’.

2nd Nov 2023 ABH: ‘we will commence the distribution process 13 November… Payment will be made to nominated shareholder bank accounts and investment platforms 4 to 5 weeks after the process commences.’ which correlates to ‘the cheques will get sent 1 week before Christmas’

21st Nov 2023 ABH: ‘pleased to confirm the distribution began its proceedings on time & will take around 5 weeks to complete’ which correlates to ‘cheques will arrive 1 week before Christmas’

21st Dec 2023 ABH: ‘in a position to transfer funds week ending 19 January 2024’ correlates as ‘cheques will be in the post, January’

19th Jan 2024 ABH: ‘affirm to establish contact with shareholders by 31st January 2024’ correlates as ‘cheques might be in the post February’

4th March 2024 ABH: ‘in a position to distribute licensing funds and conclude the process during the next 7 days’ correlates as ‘cheques will be sent next week’

8th March 2024 ABH: ‘to reiterate that the process shall conclude within the original time frame’ correlates as ‘cheques will be in the post in 3 days’

10th April 2024 ABH: ‘the agent has the funds’ correlates as ‘cheques may soon be in the post’

It can then be guaranteed 100% that the next notice will again have a variant of “the cheque is in the post”.

Similar result to Trombone.

Progression then sees concern being raised with the failure of CTAG to pay its debts ie. the non-payment of owed dividend / income payments. Which again appears to be centred on the tort of deceit ; fraud.

That is wrong, that the shareholders continue to believe. Hence why the regulatory bodies have been contacted from multiple sources with concerns of fraud.

Really not sure what he is playing at but there is a very strong suspicion of deceit being employed.

Anything that can show proof of substance in anything that Amit Ben Haim has posted, is then worth exploring.

Fraud also encompasses scientific achievements.

Where the fraud is a deception for the aim of enhancing prestige.

And so incurs a degree of mental frailty,

The most recent anomaly is perhaps the lack of any development between agent and brokers :

The book is closed so we know exactly how many shares are in circulation and exactly how much each share earns as a dividend/ income (debt owed).

There is then a trust fund already set up to hold the dividend/ income owed to the unknown shareholders.

Amit Ben Haim yet again induces delays. His weak link is that the dividend/ income is officially ‘debt owed’ ie he is now liable to pay. There is nothing stopping the agent forwarding those debt payments to the known shareholders.

“Fraud” is then one if several possibilities and so can not be ignored.

Certainly raises an interesting perspective is whether one could then expect to see any humility from ABH, given his regular humiliating recklessness with the truth ?

Lol and still here we all are, 7 years later.

For distribution proceedings to have started, as per 21st November 2023, then the conditions had been met to release the deposit [$50M] from 3rd party escrow.

16 Jan 2024 & ‘the company is delighted to confirm that agreement has now been reached in principle with the buyer [DaaP $225M] to apply a rate of interest..’

Whatever is the reason behind the delay (& don’t meaninglessly quote ‘NDA’ (at least not for the released licence fee)) be it for gaining interest payments or be it for trousering the transfer fee, or be it for funding Impulse, there is a machiavellian approach to the endless notices with their consistent agendas of recklessness with the truth.

Its a sad probability. Living in the shadows of SBH.