Member Info for HeadInTheSand

I strongly disagree, Skwizz. It's just done to meet a quota.

"with intent to make a gain for himself or another, to cause loss to another or to expose another to risk of loss.".

As I said, if there's no new potential gain involved or no new potential risk of loss, it ain't fraud.

So if the claim that Amit has not been trying to punt out any new shares since before the first of the alleged IP sale announcements is true, then it's not fraud. It's just BS instead - and in such circumstances, that's not criminal.

I see that Mystic "1.5p minimum by the end of March 24" Meg is back...

If he's not attempting to gain from spouting misinformation, then he's equally not breaking any criminal laws. Fraud and attempted fraud presuppose gain. Equally, telling porkies is not in and of itself a criminal offence.

As to whether some code of conduct has been transgressed or set of regulations breached, as the company is private and registered offshore (though nobody knows where for sure - it might be Caymans, St. Vincent, St Kitts & Nevis or somewhere else), that would presumably depend on the regulations which apply to whatever jurisdiction CTAG is currently registered in, how rigorous those regs are and how strenuously they are enforced.

...until the next heap of confetti transferred to Riverfort/YA as part of the death spiral financing Sando's signed up to.

There's literally shedloads of near worthless paper to come, sadly.

In notice that wakey managed to get a post of mine deleted. Never mind.

"I’ve acknowledged how you and many others have tried your damndest to cause upset, worry and controversy on this bb over the years…

I question your integrity"

Whispering/WM, you're again using disingenuous language.

You haven't "acknowledged" anything at all... you've merely made and unsubstantiated assertion.

Said assertion is predicated upon your further entirely subjective assertion that you know the motives behind those posting less than positively on CTAG - which of course you neither do nor can.

Of course in doing so, you entirely ignore the easily evidenced fact that to date at least, CTAG hasn't once delivered on any of its guarantees, promises, assurances or deadlines. Any rational person (i.e. one basing views on evidenced facts) would therefore come to the conclusion that a less than rosy view on CTAG is more than reasonable.

On that basis, it is literally impossible to see how you consider yourself justified in questioning anyone's integrity. Perhaps a little introspection might prove valuable?

I'd agree, MrCoffee.

Amit would obviously be keen to delete untrue information from an official company communiqué that could easily be checked by those less willing to believe that every word he utters is the gospel truth.

Re overseas registered company, does anyone actually know for sure where Cloudtag is currently registered?

I'd ask why Amit briefly named the bank allegedly holding the alleged funds, only to swiftly delete that piece of info?

22 updates since Oct 23...

Of which 18 contain promised dates...

Of which precisely none have been met.

(Oh and let's not forget the swiftly deleted name of the Chicago bank allegedly holding deposited funds).

"the realist in me is quite content with the recent flurry of updates that have come out.

not sure the realist in you can handle the truth that a payment is on its way (to shareholders anyway)"

For the record, a "truth" is a verifiable fact. If you're in the least interested in accuracy, Helx2 (I know, I know, don't all laugh at once) you should be using a word like "hope", not "truth".

It's equally clear that you don't understand the meaning of the word "realist" either...

"It's the fact that you can't accept alternative views."

Hang on a second. The dictates of rationality categorically do not demand the acceptance of "alternative views".

Sure, rationality presupposes their consideration, but not their acceptance. If the overweening weight of evidence (or the utter lack of delivery on anything ever assured, within an "alternative view" if you'd rather) shows an "alternative view" to be untenable, then the only rational thing to do is to discount and reject said "alternative view". Yes, open-mindedness is a virtue... but certainly not to the extent of gullibility. There is no merit in crashing naivity or reality denial.

Which is why I personally give no time or credence to those who insist the earth is flat or who claim that the Windsors are multi-dimensional reptilians and may decide to challenge such, if so minded.

Others of course have the inalienable right to be more acceptant of such "alternative views", maybe even deciding to believe that there are for example an infinite number of genders that can change from day to day... but that doesn't make doing so the smartest or most realistic of actions..

Amusingly and accidentally, "tantalizing" is exactly the right word.

From memory, Tantalus was condemned for his crimes against the Greek Gods to stand for all eternity in a pool of water beneath a fruit tree with low branches. Whenever he reached for the fruit, the branches always moved to raise his intended meal out of his reach. Similarly, whenever he bent down in an attempt to get a drink, the water always receded before he could touch it.

For all eternity... I'm sure that most rational appraisers of CTAG and Amit can spot the relevance.

"And one cannot assume the share price will remain the same for the next many months."

Very true. It's dropped 33% since April 15th.

Quite correct, Oofy.

One would have thought that ANGS was reasonably flush with cash at the moment, following the recent global refinancing package... but apparently not sufficiently so to meet this first of an endless series of c. £100k monthly debts that it's known about for months in cold hard readies.

Also not helping confidence is that, although we all know the approximate amount of those monthly liabilities (8% of GROSS generated field revenues from the existing SFBY wells), we've not been told a word about Trafigura's agreed offtake pricing under the replacement hedge agreement. How typically non-transparent.

I thin they're playing catch-up on their required RNSes.

Their ORRI payment (8% of gross production revenues from existing SFBY wells) ) is due every month in perpetuity (or at least for as long as ANGS continues to produce out of the existing wells). Presumably if they decide to settle April 24's ORRI royalty in shares as well, we'll very shortly get a very similar RNS relating to that transaction.

And so on... and so on....

I beg to differ. I think that a substantial number of people started questioning Amit's validity years ago while the company was still listed, after it became crystal clear that he had a predilection to spout an ever-growing series of downright porkies.

To many, precisely nothing has changed with this latest and seemingly never-ending set of fairytales.

On what basis? Because he's a short-term trader spreading ever more desperate BS in a failing ramp attempt, that's what basis.

Remember, Onetomany is the fortune-telling genius who assured anyone naive enough to listen back in January this year that the ANGS SP would be 1.5p as a minimum by the end of March.

Tragically inept and blatantly obvious.

I doubt that Ocelot is a deluded agitator. Far FAR more likely to be a PR stooge.

I personally don't have much of an issue with people believing that Amit is going to finally come good - sure, I don't think that this is supported by any evidence (quite the reverse, in fact), but hey, everyone's entitled to an opinion.

I certainly have no issue at all with people who hope for a positive outcome - why not? After all, as the man said, hope for the best, plan for the worst.

What I suspect is most liable to attract counter-comment are posts insisting on assuring one and all that a positive outcome is much more likely than not.