Member Info for mikebassetts

it was posted on another forum (advfn) i can't find the link but posted today(have a look through the days post) it was a fair and decent article in my opinion.

good article on this stock today.. can't wait for the next trading update..

from private investor have been taken up.. never seen a stock tank by over 50% and then returns to virtually the same level in less than a week..

@uk investor show https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EF4lsPRLbk

you seem a quite ignorant i lost money here so why do think i was ever posting... you've been talking the stock up at different levels but it's made no difference and now you start quoting from twitter.

getting a little desperate?

"Will we see this move higher in my opinion absolutely, this was oversold because the company did not release that crucial bit of information to the public yesterday," ----------------------- it's pretty poor to issue another RNS in less then 24 hours when they could have added more to yesterday news release.. cost me a fair bit..

could be worse... you could have hit the sell button!

and also genuine investors like myself who lost money yesterday thanks to a **** poor RNS..

not sure yet mate.. they could have RNSed some of this yesterday?

wideyed- hope it recovers for you mate,you seem a decent guy. I've taken the hit but might buy again when things are a little clearer.

but that was a complete disaster RNS..

poor day for holders.. I keep hearing about 'other revenue streams' but the market is taking no notice..

in other words a rubbish investment...

did you not read yesterdays trading update RNS?

looking good so far this morning.. return to £2.50+ could be on the cards in the not too distant future..

n my view, one of the most unsound things about the Award is the Tribunal's unsubstantiated condemnation of the Company for its failure to conduct reasonable due diligence over a period that spanned many years without ever articulating what it considered the standard due diligence program of an investor in the Indonesian mining sector was at the time. We also note that the State did not put on any such evidence. Indeed, the few due diligence materials that were incidentally on the record were filed by Churchill and went directly against the Tribunal's conclusions on this critical point: none of the documents showed that other mining investors into Indonesia considered the forgery of signatures on official State documents to be a known risk at the time, let alone that forensic document examination was a standard due diligence item for mining companies investing in Indonesia. Having not identified what it considered a reasonable due diligence process to be, we are even more confused by the Tribunal's conclusion that Churchill should have done yet more due diligence after the making of the investment. Due diligence is of course an important process but it occurs prior to the making of an investment not after.

looks like gloves off me and quite astonishing how CHL have lost this case... credit has to be given to DQ for not giving up and rightly so..

http://www.churchillmining.com/news/view/312/application-for-annulment-churchill-planet-v-indonesia/

i couldn't get anything below 80p with td.. seemed to get rejected ,like ALL the time..