Member Info for HeadInTheSand

God help anyone who lives in a North Lincolnshire town (10 letters starting with S ) that lies between Leeds and Grimsby then.

I don't even dare type the name in case I get auto-banned....

To be utterly fair here, Will's been completely open about his shareflipping agenda. That surely has to be seen as refreshingly honest. Compare and contrast with IDs like TwoFacedCoin, the utterly self-interested and deliberately misleading ArchDuke of Rampovia...

39MA, I don't think I was bending any facts. I was simply referring to the date of the licence and CTAG-issued info at that time, more than anything else.

Having said that, nobody has a clue what's transpired (or not) between CTAG and IMEC since that point, as we've both pointed out.

The core issue here - rightly described as laughable - is one it's always been... the continually missed deadlines/promises from the company. Which has led directly to the ever-shifting lines drawn in the sand by various groups of PIs. All the "Jun 2018 for sure!" and "Nov 2018 relist on Nasdaq North for definite!" and "End Q1 2019 without fail!" stuff.

I'm not sure what the latest consensus of opinion from the genuine currently is as to the date of "transformational news". Some are saying days, some weeks, some end Q3 and one or two by end 2019. I think if the vacuum lasts beyond that latter point, any further shifting of anyone's line in the sand would be finally and utterly futile.

There's no doubt that IMEC makes great silicon solutions, spends loads on R&D, and so has both great technology and significantly valuable IP.

Nobody knows what - if anything - has been occurring in the background over the last 2 1/2 years, but the only information on record (and therefore the only information currently verifiable and credible) is CTAG's licensing deal with IMEC from three plus years ago, giving the former rights to license a version of an IMEC silicon solution that existed back then.

Absolutely no shame in that, Ocelot.

Re the SP, 1.20 does (currently) seem to be a point with some sort of resistance. I'm now expecting the SP to bounce up and down around that point for a week or so, much like an extremely overworked lady of the night's lingerie.

(Still not moving my desired buy-in point though ;)

Have to love someone who is pernickety enough to correct his/her own misplaced apostrophe. Hats off to you, Ocelot!

Much like LoadOfTosh before him, FlippantYoungMan has deleted his LSE account. It's hard for company shills to keep track of which is the correct ID to reply from...

Bit of a pathetic attempt to conceal, since the damage was already done.

Will, smart move re averaging down. Should enable your flip for a marginal gain at least some time by end next week, IMO.

And hey, Archduke Ramptastic TwoFacedCoin is back oozing his fake sincerity, so maybe his weasel words will coax mugs into enabling an exit point for you.

Me? I'm now deffo not looking to pay a thing above 1.0p dead. I may miss out, but I sure as Hell ain't gonna get myself locked in :)

...says Will the accidental LTH hopefully. Heh ;)

If that old "1" code chestnut is to be believed re imminent RNS (I personally don't believe that for a second, but still...) I'd say that, looking at today's SP movement, those in the know certainly aren't expecting an encouraging RNS any time soon.

No idea what to revise a buy order down to now? 1.00 dead maybe? The last thing I want to become is a trapped-in LTH like Will now is :)

Interesting to see that The FunnyElf above accidentally forgot which of his many LSE Bulletin Board IDs he should have replied to me from... and used the "FlippantYoungMan" one instead. Oops...

Mind you, multiple ID usage has been a go-to strategy for the few company shills from pretty much day one, so this comes as no news. Brokerman/GoldBullion anyone?

Elf, you do make me laugh, you funny little man...

"HITS, Have you got anger issues or some ailment? OR were you just born a prick?
..Was a peacefull enough board before you and your side kicks came in."

A few teeny things...

First, what a brilliantly argued piece of writing to the highest intellectual standards. Not primary school playground at all.

Second, it would seem from the above that the frothing rage doesn't actually lie on my side of the fence - perhaps that mirror I recommended that you should be passed would be useful yet again?

Third, I do wonder what your problem is with freedom of expression? Does it interfere with your attempts to control the narrative?

Lastly, as to the allegation of this being "a peacefull (sic) board" before I came in... how in the world would you know? You only first appeared with your endless promises of jam tomorrow a year ago... a whole 18 months after CTAG delisted and - purely coincidentally, I'm sure - at the exact moment that Amit was trying to rustle up some more funds with his "amazing pre-IPO buy-in opportunity". On that basis, I think you'll find that you're the newbie... and again that mirror looks like it would be a very helpful thing for you. You might even grow some self-awareness?

Do have a nice day now :)

Looks like I might need to revise my 1.2 buy order down a bit?

Will, ironically enough, by buying in at your 1.445 average or whatever it was... it looks like you may have accidentally become a long-term holder...

Twitter groups...

aka shearing pens.

You have to laugh...

...to avoid pointless arguments and with a view to some of the recent argybargy on here, I thought I'd point out the following:-

1. It is literally logically impossible to prove a negative. It is therefore completely pointless to ask anyone to prove that CTAG doesn't have anything. This cannot be done.

2. We are not (yet at least) talking about any breach of criminal law. The concept of the burden of proof needing to be "beyond a reasonable doubt" therefore clearly does not apply.

3. We are also not (yet at least) talking about any breach of civil law. The concept of the lesser burden of proof needing to be "on the balance of probabilities" therefore clearly also does not apply.

4. Anyone is of course free to part or to have parted with any of their money on any basis they like for any purpose that they choose.

5. Despite 2 and 3 above, it is both normal, expected and indeed obligatory under contractual law (whether actual ore implied) when a transaction is negotiated for the selling party to make good on its side of the contract. Either by providing the goods that it contracted to sell or by delivering on any schedule and/or promises that it made prior to the transaction being completed and upon which the purchasing party will have reasonably depended, when handing over his money and completing his particular contractual side of the transaction.

And that is all. Stating the bleeding obvious, i know... but nonetheless true.

...at the moment. Anyhow, no harm in trying my luck.

Shareflippers could do with a short-term microspike up to say 1.45 (or possibly higher in your case, Will?) to get rid of existing holdings. C'mon Georgie... put your money where your mouth is!

Looks like I might need to get a new lower buy order put in place... 1.2 anyone?

Where's Georgie and his buy-in gone?

Aaaah, Brokerman... there's a trip down unpleasant memory lane.

Brokerman aka GoldBullion said a lot of things. Unfortunately, plenty of them got proven conclusively to be the exact opposite of the truth.

RustySheriff...

"One thing is certain, it most definitely won't be running into 2020."

Another line in the sand, eh? Hopefully this one won't be abandoned like LoadOfTosh's equally fervently claimed "Q3 2019 for sure!" version...

Okay, I'll await the next four and three quarter months with interest then.

"HITS, back in the day I used to have lots of fairly constructive arguments with you. I could never understand why you were here other than looking to witness a train wreck and get a large portion of I told you so to gloat with.

If I were you, I'd crab sideways off this board and gracefully exit. You're about to get a whole load of egg on your face if you don't."

Nope, RustySheriff, you're wrong on two key points.

1. I do not pop on here to gloat or tritely get off on some "I told you so" routine. I have always said that, for the sake of genuine PIs (and there are some of them), I sincerely hope that my own opinion on CTAG is wrong.

2. As previously promised, if this does come good, I'll absolutely pop back in here to be force-fed all the humble pies anyone want to cram down me. For info, I did have a date for such an "egg on face" session pre-arranged with LoadOfTosh for Sept this year... but he's since decided to run away and delete his account.

I'm not expecting there to be any risk of #2 above at all... but that's what I'll do. Although to be fair, if the information vacuum limbo extends (like I think it's bound to) into 2020, I'll probably get bored of popping in now and then.

But sure, if this comes good before end 2019, have your custard pies and rotten vegetables at the ready.