Member Info for HeadInTheSand

Aaaaah LoadOfTosh... another self-proclaimed and oh so supportive CTAG "LTH" who first joined the LSE BBs... wait for it... less than three months ago. Kind of late in the day for such a committed and supportive long-term holder to magically appear, but hey...

I just can't wait for the second "amazing pre-IPO investment opportunity" to be presented to existing shareholders. Mind you, after all the practice that CTAG has had in parting PIs from their hard-earned in exchange for diddly squat, I really would have expected a load more skilful and and a load less obvious efforts to prime the very few still gullible to throw in more cash.

ABH seriously needs to find himself a better class of minion.

Dougal,

Given that I cannot remember a single notification from Cloudtag that was ever independently verifiable as being truthfu and accuratel - but I can remember plenty that were eventually independently verifiable as being complete and utter BS - I think you'll be waiting a very very long time, if those are what your pre-conditions are for investing even further.

Mind you, this would in fact be a good thing, because it'll stop you chucking even more of your hard-earned into the bottomless pit of no return...

AIMO.

That's surprisingly courageous of you Dougal, given that last time:-

a) ABH effectively did clearly and explicitly name a senior appointee (he made the individual incredibly easily and uniquely identifiable)... except this appointment was entirely untrue, as CTAG must have known at the time.

b) ABH promised a November re-list (which to date shows no signs of happening).

As I said a week or so ago, it's much easier to keep fleecing those who have already been fleeced...

...this morning, I see.

Specifically the ones pointing out that HGB, who:-

a) claims to be a long term holder and

b) who further claims to have bought more shares in CTAG before the "amazing pre-IPO opportunity" was even offered and

c) who is intent on assuring anyone who'll listen that things are about to come good for CTAG

...registered on the LSE BBS on Aug 24th... the exact same day that the pre-IPO further buy-in opportunity was offered by the company... and the exact same day that ABH made the unfortunately spurious website announcement about the appointment of Mr. Risebrow.

Can anyone think of any reason why certain people with certain oh so blatantly clear agendas would still attempt to control the narrative by getting such posts deleted?

I'm still awaiting the launch of "amazing pre-IPO buy-in opportunity #2"...

To be fair, the debt was solely reduced by the bondholders agreeing to the D4E swap, where they exchanged around $500m of loans for 92.5% of the newly expanded total shares within Avanti.

On the surface, not at all the best business decision, since looking at today's SP, the bondholders swapped around $500m of effectively repayable loans in exchange for shares worth around $70m. There's a big fat loss then - but probably better than the consequences of them not agreeing to do so.

Unlike many other previously nationalised industries, the UK as a nation doesn't need what AVN has to offer - these days there are far higher performance and far more cost-effective broadband delivery technologies available - so it would make precisely no sense to pour UK taxpayers' money into shoring the company up.It'd just continue to bleed out cash.

Now, if the government of Nigeria or any sub-Saharan African nation were to look to buy into AVN, that would at least make superficial sense...

"What has happened to our entrepreneurs?"...

Well in the case of the previous AVN CEO, he's made himself extremely rich at the expense of private investors - while at the same time leaving the vehicle in which said private investors were persuaded to invest teeters on the edge of debt-buried insolvency.

That's pretty entrepreneurial, I'd say...

Your guess is as good as anyone's, Cagney - as you'll already know, you dodged a bullet by not buying in at 11p.

My own opinion only is that:-

If AVN can support its current and still hamstringing debt levels and if it can start to secure many more cast-iron revenue-assuring deals in geographies suited to the services it provides, then there's a school of thought that says the SP can't go much lower.

But those are big and outstanding "ifs"- and always have been for AVN.

My recent own back of a fag packet calculation suggested to me that AVN needed to triple or more likely quadruple existing sales revenue levels pretty much immediately, if it was to prevent itself bleeding cash so profusely.

But we all know what opinions are like... and everyone's got one.

Tyche, since I've mostly considered you to be someone largely in possession of their faculties and with a reasonable degree of common sense (for all that we disagree on the brightness of AVN's future), I'd be interested to hear what price you'd consider to be a reasonable entry point and of course when, if you feel like sharing it.

Trying to look at things with a fresh set of eyes, unless one's into short-term day/week trading, it's looking very tricky to identify AVN's low point, because it doesn't seem yet to have been found?

Reality check.

It has entirely been the actions and decisions of Avanti's executive team against a backdrop of other faster-evolving and competitive broadband delivery technologies that has led to the company's share price dropping by around 98% over the last four years.

To pretend that such a massive, sustained and still ongoing SP fall has anything to do with comments made on some backwater bulletin board is to be deliberately naive and to refuse to face up to reality.

Entirely justified non-supportive comments made here are the result of Avanti's performance, not the cause of it.

Dougal, you're right.

There have been a couple of other equally new IDs suddenly appearing on this BB, all having joined LSE at around the same time (end Aug/early Sep), and all busily assuring anyone who'd listen that everything's simply fabulous within the world of Cloudtag...

Can't imagine why...

...and equally right on cue, an ID that only joined LSE chat on.. wait for it... Aug 24th (gee, whoda thunk? Could that maybe just be the date of the amazing pre-IPO investment opportunity and the latest factually bereft Cloudtag website update?) turns up.

To assure everyone that everything is fine and dandy in the world of Cloudtag because hey, he has an inside track and again to claim that he's delighted to have invested a load more cash in CTAG at the back end of August...

Seriously? That's the best hustle now left in the CTAG bag of tricks?

The timeline on CT Technology Services runs thus:-

Date of petition for compulsory liquidation of CT Tech Services - Oct 26th 2017 (according to Companies House)

Date of consultancy agreement being signed between CT Tech Services and H. Risebrow - May 2018 (according to Hugh himself)

Date of commencement of winding up of CT Tech Services as insolvent - Jun 20th 2018 (according to Companies House)

Date of announcement of the appointment of someone who was obviously H. Risebrow to the Cloudtag senior management team - Aug 24th 2018 (according to the Cloudtag website).

Given Mr. Risebrow's statements on this matter, the sole conclusion possible is that this was yet more deliberately misleading information and blatantly factually incorrect given out by ABH and Cloudtag.

...were indeed 100% cast-iron definitely made by the man himself.

Easily confirmable by emailing the official Latchmore email address given.

Oh dear...

AIM4, I think it's blatantly obvious that the purpose of that Aug 24th announcement (which was made on the CTAG website) was to make the individual very easily identifiable, without actually naming him.

Given that the announcement seems to have been made long after the very brief and very tenuous consultancy arrangement with said individual had lapsed due to subsidiary insolvency, I can only draw the conclusion that CTAG was looking to garner itself some utterly unwarranted credibility at that specific time by associating itself with the individual concerned.

I'm sure that if the company thought there was a possibility of claiming an association with Stephen Hawking, Steve Jobs or Albert Einstein at that time, it would have happily done so.

I'm oh so certain that this announcement being made by Cloudtag at the precise time it was trying to beg more investment out of existing long-suffering PIs was unutterably coincidental...

That is as maybe, HGB and you may of course do (or claim to have done) as you please. But that's not the point.

CTAG's Aug 24th update said this:-

Amit Ben-Haim, CEO of Cloudtag Inc. is pleased to announce that the Company has completed one senior appointment, whose name will be announced in later updates due to contractual arrangements.

Head of UK Private Healthcare

This individual has over 20 years in UK healthcare leadership roles with organisations. These include: CEO of Aid-Call plc; CEO of BUPA Dental; Business Development Director at United Health Europe; CEO of Interhealth Canada in Europe; Commercial Director at Guy’s m& St Thomas’ NHS FT; and CEO at Synlab UK.

Now if poster Hugh is to be believed - and this is the work of 30 seconds to check - there was in fact no "senior appointment" at all. That was apparently yet another CTAG "major misrepresentation of reality" and here are the salient points:-

Poster Hugh states that he merely signed a consultancy agreement with CT Technology Services Ltd back in May 18, which as he says never came to anything.

Quite possibly in part because CT Technology Services Ltd - the entity with whom Mr Risebrow had signed his consultancy agreement - was wound up as insolvent a mere month later in June 18, according to Companies House..

Cloudtag's trumpeted August update very clearly (and in my book quite deliberately) referring to Hugh Risebrow came out 2 months AFTER that insolvency.

So... at the time of the Cloudtag Aug 24th announcement, there was quite literally zero official or contractual relationship of any kind between the company or any of its subsidiaries and Mr. Risebrow.

And yet, despite (obviously) being fully aware of this, CTAG still made the announcement... just as the "amazing pre-IPO investment opportunity" was coming to a close. I'm sure nobody can come up with a reason as to why it might have done this.

I really don't need to join the dots any more obviously. Suffice it to say, when it comes to Cloudtag and factual accuracy, it would very clearly seem that a leopard never changes its spots

This is starting to have the ring of truth about it - to say the least. The alleged Mr Risebrow's replies are to date both well written, offer proof to anyone wanting to take a minute to email Latch more and are cogently pragmatic. As he points out, what practical recourse would he actually have against a private offshore company for such misrepresentation? Or - if one is to be WAY too overly charitable to CTAG - for such overexaggeration? None, that's what.

More to the point now, presuming poster Hugh is real Hugh (easily checkable), it looks like the Aug 24th "update", issued just as the company was looking to tap up unwary PIs for yet more investment in the "amazing pre-IPO opportunity", was as a fair few suspected just more of the same CTAG substance free spin, solely designed to inspire further investment.

When the dust settles, this long and torturously drawn out 419 scheme seriously deserves its own TV miniseries.

Jan 2015. AVN SP = 231.5. GCCRa's opinion = "Top up now! Get in while you still can! Amazing opportunity!"

Jan 2016. AVN SP = 166.2. GCCRa's opinion = "Top up now! Get in while you still can! Amazing opportunity!"

Jan 2017. AVN SP = 22.2. GCCRa's opinion = "Top up now! Get in while you still can! Amazing opportunity!"

Jan 2018. AVN SP = 8.4. GCCRa's opinion = "Top up now! Get in while you still can! Amazing opportunity!"

Jan 2019. AVN SP = 2.7. GCCRa's opinion = "Top up now! Get in while you still can! Amazing opportunity!"

And there's me thinking that even a broken watch was bound to be right twice a day....

...or HIGHBROW RUSE

(just sayin')

I don't just concede that, Dougal - in my view the whole point of the 24th August announcement was to make the individual very easily identifiable.

Which at the time I thought was a tad odd - the actual name was allegedly being kept confidential "due to contractual arrangements", but at the same time being made completely obvious. A bit like saying "we're appointing someone. We can't give you any information on who this is, because it's deathly top secret, but by the way his name rhymes with Shoe Prizecow."

As to Huge Eyebrow demanding a retraction, if it were not true? I ask why/how would he have even been aware that he was being linked with some tiny little delisted private company?