Member Info for Eloro

Lord Braggart, the 0p came about because you claimed that if we vote against Scott the company would be sold for peanuts. Yet, in your next boast, you went on to say that the SP doesn't matter and our vote doesn't natter, that only the big boys have control. You can't have can't have it both ways even deep in your narcissistic throes:)

NAL, have you seen the movie Shane starring Alan Ladd? One of my all time favourite Western. If you haven't seen it, check it out. The seminal moment is the gunfight between Shane and Wilson. Shane called Wilson a low down Yankee Liar, to which Wilson replied, Prove it. You calling folks liars, so prove it.

It's quite alright Anon3, when they go low, I go high:)

"People with narcissistic personality disorder tend to consider themselves grand, important, and better than others. Grandiose behaviour, which helps establish this sense of personal importance, might involve:bragging about personal achievements and skills."

Now, which poster on this BB who best fit the description given above? Only one poster I can think of who mentions his wife in most of his posts!!

Watch out, Lord Braggart has arrived!

It won't be long before we are reading posts about the size of his position, and the large position his wife holds in solg. Everyone are mathematically illiterate and only his Turing like abilities can provide all of the answers here.

I wonder who is looking after his wife while he is on here making himself disagreeable? Lady Chatterley's Lover comes to mind:)

I detect an all talk and nothing in the trousers department boaster on the BB:)

Nincompoop Aussie Loser, you love to label folks as liars, yet provide no evidence to prove the falsehood which you are alleging. Since you are claiming falsehood, the onus is on you to provide the evidence to prove that you are right. It is not our responsibility to prove to you that we are right. You are not the final arbiter of truth here.

Cheers Add, hopefully a raise will not be necessary if like Warren tweeted that the DDs must be coming to an end soon.

Add,

From my recent email exchange with Bob, the 157m shares are available to use strategically. I think that this option would be pursued before resorting to a raise at these ridiculous price. I did express my concern to him that a raise now would decimate the SP given that the raise would most likely be done at a discount. So, I believe that he is aware of our concerns as PIs.

NAL:Before you cast doubt on my veracity, Maxit email address is on their website. Even you can send Bob an email and he will reply. Although, I would recommend that you use ChatGpt to compose that email for you. Then again, you composing the email would give him a good laugh when reads it:)

Points taken Bozi. You are right, I did not carry out a peer review, comparison. I guess that my only focus is solg, and I am holding come what may. Plus, I have a day job and young kids, so I cannot dedicate as much time to research as I did when I bought solg in the first place. I am not worried. Short of a nationalisation, we have the asset and it will be sold or disposed of one way or the other.

I will no longer interact with the GFD, CEO, braggart about how I will vote my solg shares.

There is a verse I try to live by(KJV):

"He that humbleth himself shall be exalted. He that exalteth himself shall be abase (made low)."

The GFD, CEO, CCD, BBC, ITV would do well to remember the virtue of being humble. Got an appointment now.

Bozi, I don't know how you can be 100% certain that people like me are blatantly wrong?

No one knows exactly what is going on in the background for certain. You are making deductions based on available information. Equally, folks can arrive at different conclusions than yourself from their review of the same available information. Only time will tell who is right and who is wrong.

I will finish by saying that no one on this BB saw the merger coming and posted about it before it happened. No one knew that BSC were about to sell their position before it happened. No one knew that the SP would fall from 40p to 7p and posted about it before that happened. We are all left to guess, with egos like Red making out that he knew everything before they happened.

Red, you are the one who said that its only the big boys vote that counts. I believe my vote counts and I don't need to brag and boast about how many shares myself and my wife owns.

I am beginning to understand now why so many posters dislike you both here and on the next BB Red. Arrogant, condescending, boastful and a poster who thinks only his views matters and that you are a genius and everyone else are simpletons. No matter how you try to demean me to make yourself look more puffed up than you already are, I will vote my shares how I see fit and not because of anything which you have to say.

Excellent points Guys.

If our vote doesn't carry any weight, then it won't matter how we vote. Excellent point Anon3.

Clearly, NM felt that our vote counted, otherwise he would not have sent emails, letters asking for our vote.

Of course SM I know that 0p means game over. My point is I am not afraid if the SP falls to 0p and I lose my money. The pain was already caused when the SP fell from 40p to 7p. Of course I want the SP to recover. But I am not going to allow the fear of peanuts, or the SP falling from where it is now, determine how I vote.

Folks can't have it both ways. One minute the SP doesn't matter, next if you don't vote for Scott the SP will be peanuts. I am curious what peanut is when we are at 8 to 9p?

Red, you are missing my point.

My response was to the folks who said that if BHP took over we would be sold for peanuts.

What is peanuts when we fell from 40p to 7p?

If BHP takes over, the worst that could happen is the SP falling from 8p to 0p which to my mind is not as bad as the SP falling from 40p to 7p. So what is peanuts when we are already at 8p?

Furthermore Red, are you saying that you would be happy to invest into a company where the ceo doesn't care about the SP because the SP is irrelevant?

Unlike you and TI, I don't go around wi-lly waving about the size of my share holding. My vote will count, and so will the vote of every shareholder. Otherwise, you would not be trying so hard to persuade us to vote for Scott.

50 years of investing heh NAL?

Clearly they had you in mind when they said that there is no fool like an old fool:)

So, if you have been investing for 50 years, that would put you in your 70s at the earliest. Spending your twilight years on this BB is you playing your favourite sport of Coffin dodging:)

At least you can blame your illiteracy on dementia. Have you changed your diaper yet NAL?

Being a schoolboy is infinitely better than having to rely on a carer for the basics heh NAL!

Precisely Bozi!

The "if" which you mentioned is the leap of faith which I mentioned. Either way, that's why I haven't made a final decision on how I will vote. I know all about taking a leap of faith. So, having to take one will not be a deterrent for me. Plus, Warren hasn't sold the remainder of his solg position as yet.

I take your points Bozi.

Voting to keep Scott will be taking a leap of faith that a bid will be made within the next 12 months. It would be a leap of faith because at present, we do not have enough information regarding what is going on with the discussions. Even Warren has moved away from his 6 months sale time line.

Folks should be aware of the situation we will be in if after 12 months, no bid, and we will then need to find a new ceo.

I mentioned the SP Bozi because you previously mentioned it's possible fall as a reason why we need to keep Scott.

You have hit the nail on its head Covgaz. We will be taking a leap of faith that Scott will be able to get a bid within the next 12 months. If he doesn't, we are left with option A).

At least folks are now fully aware of the possible outcomes if we keep Scott and no bid manifest within the next 12 months. The argument to vote for Scott makes sense if the chance of a bid is 51% or better. Back to Add's point that we should have more info so that we can make an informed decision.

Bozi, for B, I wrote "We spend 6 months to a year"

A year=12 months. Maybe not in NAL's world.

For both A and B, we would be stuck trying to find a new ceo. At least with B it would happen sooner.

All we can hope for is that with A, a bid would manifest. No guarantee of a bid mind you.