Blencowe Resources: Aspiring to become one of the largest graphite producers in the world. Watch the video here.
Not sure MrYFronts,
Queeld case is regarding share certificates, I would suspect there needs to be a judgement on that before damages could then be considered but if EUA do not have the cash to pay the disputed legal bill, what could Queeld be awarded.
I would imagine Queeld would be better with asset sales along with an increased share price once they have the shareholdings be confirmed. Just my views.
Toffers,
Please reread my post, digest and understand. I am not deceiving, just stating that cases can be withdrawn. And what did the last RNS state and if EUA come to a satisfactory conclusion, the case won't be heard.
Hi Toffers,
Not running away as you suggested. As the caseboard source indicates, case status can change and here is one example.
Case Number
CR-2023-LDS-000817
Court/List
Companies
Petition - Winding Up Petition
Inferred Case Status
Case Concluded (Withdrawn)
B1ll,
I know that but it is only recently CS doubled his salary, but your statement would suggest he has been paid in excess of at least £1.8 million. You made the statement, I am not disputing it, but I presume you have the information at hand to make such a statement.
If we want to improve this board, then any statements of facts should be verified. Would you not agree with this?
Right, this is for the records and therefore, cannot be disputed.
As someone who has suffered from mental illness in the past requiring medical assistance, I do not condone any referencing of mental illness to any poster.
Toffers - I have not heard from the Met police but what I suggested about you was your vulnerability due to your admitted financial loss on EUA. Your anger witnessed today and over the weekend is not healthy, but I will say no more on this matter as there is no consistency with you.
No poster on this board knows me yet they make their own conclusions but at least I am invested and will continue to monitor EUA over the coming days/weeks.
Spike, no need to apologise for your link or effort to justify another posters posting but I have made my position clear.
Any poster who questions my personal disclosure does not understand the impact of mental health issues.
Spike,
I am happy to call this out once you have apologised as your link yesterday at 21.22 to Wikipedia, was clearly posted to expand on mental disabilities and justify Mr Wolfe's post. If not, explain why you posted the link.
Anyway, I have work to do so I will dip in later or tomorrow and see if I can see your apology or reason for posting the link. Also, you will not get answers on this board so, I emailed the company and NOMADs first thing this morning.
Make,
You are 100% correct.
I am now interested in Mr Spike reply as they also state/quote replies from posters with a reference.
So Spikeyj, referencing mental disabilities on this board is acceptable ?
Will simplify this Toffers,
GP refers you to hospital - why ! See a specialist, both are Doctors and so you think a financial advisor or even an accountant understands the role of a solicitor or the legal profession.
Please put me back on filter Toffers. I want to stay polite.