Member Info for Luckybob23

And as fir the sp here. Lots of people have multiple roles in multiple companies.

Let's not kid ourselves, AZ isn't working 8 hours a day at syme.. every part of it has employees to do their role.

What do you think he's doing? Spending all day on the phone asking banks for money?

Rtop was a spin out to pay off his debts, it was never a business, just a load of fluff .

AZ claimed to be a regulatory expert and he set up rtop so he could charge syme for the expertise he should of been giving as the CEO of his own company.

He then used that revenue to come up with a greatly inflated etop valuation and pumped the price so his mates and him could sell shares while mugs bought them.. problem was, nobody bought the story or the shares , hence it plummeted and suspended so it could disappear into the mirky shadows it was born from.

I've no idea what his play at nuburu is, I can't fathom why he'd get a position there given he's pledged to bail them out and failed to pay..

Hostile takeover? To what end , I've no idea.

But as usual it stinks.

If it were dumping it would of ended ages ago.

It's 5 years of trading.

Spoofing for tiny margins

Not what they said originally though, was it!

The whole business requires £€$ real money.

They aren't monetising inventory with tokens.

Don't see how the two things work against each other.

One is a way of minimising tax liability

The other is a way of freeing up working capital.

The reason syme hasn't done much is because AZ can't convince enough people to fund the inventory at a cost and profit suits everyone without risk to the funder

Big fingers..

.... this letter of intent, this that and the other all in the making and we are right around the corner from being a valid working business ..

But that's been going g on nearly 5 years and from the point of view of the auditors how many times do they take a chance and give good faith signing it off and how many times do they risk not getting paid before they say,, "not enough evidence to support your own statements for us to put our neck on the line"

I think the resignation comes down to one thing..

The going concern

Are syme a business .

Previously they've signed off on the basis that there are still big risks, bit with syme saying we have this pipeline, this letter of intent, this

"but what was it that made them interested in the 1st place 🤔"

A salary.

They get paid to do their job.

There's an argument to be made that say both statements are true.

Syme currently working with Bbpm to get the transaction done

And

BBpm are not using symes platform.

Because until that transaction is complete, they aren't.

The bottom line 2g2d is we were mislead with fluff and nonsense by a blagger

I'd say you should of gone into politics, but they'd rip your ridiculous arguments to pieces in a few seconds.

You keep talking about how it's everyone's fault for investing.

Let me point out a few things.

From day one the client numbers were a lie, they claimed to have billions in inventory to monetise.

When in actual fact, what they'd used as client figures were just a bunch of companies who said it was an interesting idea.

We were all told from day one that we had funders lined up to monetise this imaginary inventory, not just a few funders, lots of funders. You can see that in all interviews in the first two years.

We were told within the first few months that a 30m tranche of inventory was weeks away from being complete, it was in the final stages.

Then there was the sharia element, which was going to be huge.

While all this was going on, accountants questioned the "true sale" aspect , this was brought up numerous times, this is the key to symes business model..

AZ told anyone questioning the concept , investors at AGM and in communication and in interviews, that true sale was bullet proof.

It wasn't!

It took four more years before the company finally admitted that.

We also have a huge list of strange actives.

A huge list of announcements that never came to anything.

So, you tell us what research we should of done.

Shouldn't be difficult.

When you've got a newly listed company, claiming to have a bullet proof new idea, with billions in clients and all the funding you need to carry out that business, it's easy to value a fintech at the ridiculous figure.

And btw, this was not an untested business model, it was based on supposed two previous transactions which proved the businesses model.

But as we've learned , over the last few years, the clients were BS, the funders didn't want to risk their money, because of the flawed business model.

The CEO is a narcissistic liar who made up a load of stuff and managed to draw in us mugs but couldn't pull the wool over they eyes of those holding the money he needed to make the business work.

You still need to exercise them and that will cost you more than buying shares much cheaper on the open market

You realise that peel sold from over 10% to less than the other day and now they've bought it back?

That's just an illusion

Because it doesn't suit the narrative of today's mission to drive the price back to

0.0044 by placing lots of tiny trades , so they can keep making miniscule amounts buying and selling .

Similarly chewys post declaring whatever rumours going round on TG to be yet again more nonsense, has also been selectively deleted.

It won't shut anyone up.

Because we've heard it all before.

The only thing that will change anything here is showing revenue increasing and business deals rolling out that don't take a year to actually happen.

You conveniently forget we were told we had 2-8 billion in funding

Or we were about to complete on storm harbour

Or the captive bank was nearly completed

Or any other number of things.

Shareholders and the market don't believe anything he says.

The only way to reverse that is showing revenue over and over again.

I don't, but it still makes more logical sense that what AnOtHeRnEwPrOfIlE spouted.

Why aren't you pulling them up on their delusion post?

Exactly, the only people making money trading it are those manipulating the price with lots of tiny buys or sells

Alan, though I lean toward your view more than I do the people who seem to have rose tinted glasses, it certainly helps not to over egg the pudding.

Dilution is about 110% (without doing the math) from the beginning.

Which in the grand scheme of things and in comparison to most shares, isn't diluted to hèll

I do generally share your pessimistic attitude but let's be factual please