Member Info for Luckybob23

It's disappeared on my phone and instead there's a

Yes, congratulations yet again for another attempt to mislead people 2g2d.

It's not my opinion that you are lying.

It's clear as day.

You need to stop making stuff up for your cràppy trading activities.

First you copy some idiots username, act like you are new , then you go straight into making up nonsense.

It won't wash. We've seen it all before and everyone here wants actual real news so re can reclaim our ridiculous losses , not some nut job making up rubbish.

Where's your evidence of anything you've said since you joined?

What model are you talking about?

You said they are doing the same thing but without inventory monetisation.

Symes entire model is inventory monetisation via true sale.

That's the business model .

Without inventory monetisation they aren't doing the same thing at all

"I'd hate to be the lads having to write an article about a fraud being backed by JPM and up 5000%"

Syme isn't backed by JPM

Syme is main market, as such no nomad

Syme isn't listed on AIM, if it were AZs statements would of come under some scrutiny.

I checked yesterday.

The reported buy price was 0.0085.

The actual buy price was 0.0079.

All the 0.0085 trades were automated, over the ask to manipulate

Old Chinese proverb say beware of man with yet another new profile spouting nonsense

The level of poor quality deflection is embarrassing.

OK Walter Mitty

Posts were been removed long before rosie and castle turned up.

Since what get removes seems to depend on what end of the trade their working I'd suggest it's accounts who we don't hear a dickie bird from. Sat in the background.

Nobody here can know who is reporting what , unless they work for lse and can see it.

Also the idea that itl all come good once loan shares are returned has one other SERIOUS FLAW, the largest loan share amount doesn't mature until 2027

Makes a good story so people can sell the idea of a short squeeze doesn't it!

Only problem is, if they have to buy back they'll just manipulate it as they're buying , same as they've done for trading, so it won't go up.

"Why buy and return to borrower at 0.05 when 0.001 is more appealing ?"

Why buy back at all when the agreement states OR CASH.

Which we've already had, thus cancelling itself out.

Let me more clear.

One is an official company statement about the legal agreement .

The other is a bloke stating something outside of those parameters.

"AZ confirmed the shares HAVE to be returned to TAG....😵‍💫"

Savvy, you can't pick n choose when to believe AZ and when not to.

It states un the RNS loan shares returned or cash.

That's the RNS, AZ is making a statement that contradicts the legal agreement made with the loan companies.

It's secured against the inventory, which though held by the client is owned by the stock company, because of true sale.

In the event of failure to repurchase, the stock company uses remarketers to sell for less than the full value, which is why CH Trading hub need to provide 15% of the total value, so they take the loss on reselling and not the bank who get their 85% back.

2g2d, you should read what you copy n paste.

- the dedicated Stock Company will fund the WL Transaction through a combination of the SECURED ?8.5million bank debt from BBPM and ?1.5million of equity investment from the CH Trading Hub'