Member Info for jalpa

Evidence: You never published the results of any of the much publicized trials. I put it to you, you only published these trials to stimulate the share price. The results were never published because the results were profoundly negative or the trials never even took place. Which is it?

Evidence: No cost effective 1.5kW scrolls are manufactured, despite the market for such a machine.

Evidence: Multiple statements made by ex-employees the boiler wasn't fit for purpose.

Evidence: You cant explain what a "soft launch" is and why the "sales process" never began.

Evdience: The boiler never appeared and the IP was worthless.

"no dried up punchbag of an ex-emlpoyee will do anything more" are you sure no dried up punch bag haasnt given statements under oath in support of investigations and pending action? If you are sure, how can you be? After all, let me remind you,no boiler has ever been seen and the IP was sold for a pittance. Worthless. And yet individuals substantially profited out of this company. A company that not once made a profit but depemded wholly on the money it could extract from investors. Incentive??? I would say so.

So you can explain to the court and jury exactly what a "soft launch" is and why you felt the need to use the term instead of simply marketing and selling the "production" boilers that were being produced in volume?

You state "first production model" when in reality this was in fact a prototype was it not? No customer would accept this prototypes performance in terms of noise and reliability and based on what we have heard the product was never capable of paying for itself, so evidently not for sale.You knew this to be the casend confirmed such when the proposed "sales phase" was later changed to the ambiguous "soft launch"....

It is clealy stated "Initiating production is clearly the most significant achievement to date for the Group. 10 years of development culminates in this moment, where the first production model of the Flow boiler rolls off the production line" followed by "Jabil will now manufacture 500,000 game-changing Flow boilers". We have seen charts displaying the huge rise in share price these staements elicited.We have heard and read staements from ex-employees. Can you now enlighten the court and tell us exactly how many boilers "rolled off" the production line between the first statement and the second? And how it was possible they could be "gamecahnging" if we have heard they weren't fit for purpose?

"We are delighted that Jabil will now manufacture 500,000 game-changing Flow boilers, rather than the original 390,000"......my my my my what will your honour think and how will he judge??? I put it to you that greed was your ultimate motivation and my only recourse is....

.Let us look back in time (to November 2014) and see where men's greed can lead them...... "Initiating production is clearly the most significant achievement to date for the Group. 10 years of development culminates in this moment, where the first production model of the Flow boiler rolls off the production line that we expect to produce hundreds of thousands of Flow boilers over the coming years. We now move into our sales phase, with our full launch planned for mid-January 2015......deary deary me the stench

I had assumed custody

There seems to be confusion. Just because a company is listed on AIM does not mean because it is considered a high risk investment it is at liberty to mislead and deceive the market. It is not. Just as walking in a rough neighborhood means it becomes legal to rob your car or wallet. Are any ex-employees prepared to make written statements under oath?

Well given you are throwing money in a company that is worthless and has no future, if it isn't gambling, what is it?

Because people, usually people with a gambling problem, behave like sheep and feed on hysteria...which fuels a buying frenzy.

Has anyone got any popgoestheweasel classics? When he was confident,deluded and amusing...not the broken whopper he is now...

in the case of a crime, I believe the individual(s) who committed the offence is/are liable. Limited Liability only extends to financial liabilities. So in the case of Fraud, a criminal offence, the fact it has allegedly been committed by a company on the AIM market is no defense. The individuals responsible would be prosecuted.

And of course the more a defence wriggles and squirms, the more wretched the stench of guilt.

Given the incentive to mislead was a financial one, I think a judge and jury would not differentiate between "initiating" and any other word used or not, but would consider whether in November 2014 the boiler was still in a prototype form that needed considerable development or not. The RNS is clear in that it sates "volume production has been initiated" which is unambiguous. What happened after November 2014 is irrelevant.Bang to rights. Open and shut.

or having a remotely acceptable level of performance reasonably expected of a domestic boiler..including noise levels, reliability and life expectancy. A boiler that generates electricity for, let us suppose, 100 hours producing 85dBA clearly wouldn't be fit for purpose, installation or sale. A development prototype. Not even a pre-production sample.