Member Info for Muck165

More on the LJMU partnership from Yentra today.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/yentra-ai_sovereignai-enterpriseai-aiadoption-activity-7473749788992278528-UsxE?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAEuI5eIBooawepY_Ubn_CKcFOzTXAaBN1HA

True - nobody knows the current value of Gulf., beyond what's on its latest balance sheet.

But we do know the last accounts it filed at companies house were Micro Accounts, and to be eligible for that, for the year in question, Gulf had to satisfy at least 2 of three conditions;

Turnover: Not more than £632,000

Balance sheet total (gross assets) Not more than £316,000

Average employees Not more than 10

Given the accounts show c£4m of gross assets (so failing condition 2) and 3 employees ( so satisfying condition 3) , the only inference we can make is that Gulf had to have revenue in the year of less than £632k,

Don’t agree with you on that ASI.

Its getting really annoying why things like this aren't RNS'd.

The posts from Yentra and the repost by Natie both make clear they view this as a milestone moment, and even the RNS yesterday gave basic details.

So why is it that when its actually made public, the market isn't told.

Its baffling to see a CEO do so little to promote his own company.

Partnership announced

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/natierau_yentraai-liverpoolbusinessschool-ljmu-share-7473323399528976385-sqe6/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAEuI5eIBooawepY_Ubn_CKcFOzTXAaBN1HA

The info is out there publicly so that can't be the reason I don't think.

Of course, all the Court Registry tells us is that a new hearing has been ordered for 1 July - doesn't stop all sorts of negotiations going on between now and then which might render that hearing pointlless.

Personally I think it more likely that MPL just haven't told us yet, but lets see.

You too.

Although definitive RNS are like hens teeth!

In the meantime I’ll continue to share and muse.

ATB

No problem 86KB

Yep, those other matters are some of the other interlocutory matters I referred to.

The main case here, under which everything is filed, is C.P. (IB) 154(MB)/2025

The interlocutory matter we are most interested in here is IA(IBC)(PLAN) 35(MB)/2026, because that is the one the deals with the creditors proposals (PLAN)

Nope - it is an order made by the Judge to list this matter for 1 July. It was uploaded to the Court registry yesterday.

And as for an RNS, remember MPL didn't tell us about the adjournment until w days later.

Look, I don't really care what people want to believe. I've shared what is on the official Court registry and as far as I am concerned its crystal clear.

So this is

“ ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING ON 08.06.2026”

and makes the order

“ List this matter before the regular Bench on 01.07.2026”

This is the text of the order made

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL,

MUMBAI BENCH COURT III

Item No. 114

IA(IBC)(PLAN) 35(MB)/2026, IA (I.B.C) 1324 (MB)/2026

IA (I.B.C) 1629 (MB)/2026

In

C.P. (IB) 154(MB)/2025

CORAM: SH. K. R. SAJI KUMAR, MEMBER (J)

SH. HARIHARAN NEELAKANTA IYER, MEMBER (T)

ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING ON 08.06.2026

(HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE)

NAME OF THE PARTIES: Canara Bank

Vs.

Karanja Terminal & Logistics Private Limited

Appearance

For Applicant : Adv. Rishabh Dhanuka, Adv. Anisha Didwana

For RP : Sr. Adv. Prateek Seksaria, Adv. Shriraj Khambete,

Adv. Raunak Doshi

For Respondent : Sr. Adv. Gaurav Joshi Adv. Anoop Rawat,

Adv. Arushi Sharma for R-2 & 3, Sr. Adv. Sandeep Singhi

a/w Adv. Abhishek Mukhergee, Adv. Saloni Kapadia, Adv.

Harsh Rathi

SECTION 7 OF THE IBC, 2016

__________________________________________________________________________

ORDER

IA(IBC)(PLAN) 35(MB)/2026, IA (I.B.C) 1324 (MB)/2026

IA (I.B.C) 1629 (MB)/2026

List this matter before the regular Bench on 01.07.2026.

Im sure you could find the same thing a different way, but that’s how I’ve been doing it!

Start here

https://efiling.nclt.gov.in/casehistorybeforeloginmenutrue.drt

Select “party name” from the drop-down

In the next section you need to enter

Bench - Mumbai

Party Type - Petitioner

Party Name - Canara Bank

Case Year - 2025

Status - pending

A list all all pending cases Canara is involved with started in 2025 comes up.

Scroll down to row 26, and click the highlighted filing number 2709138094112024

Then select “case proceeding details

You can access pdf copies of all interim rulings made in the main and interlocutory matters.

Right at the top is the order im referring to. It orders the matter be listed for 1 July.

It won’t yet appear on any cause list because that only comes out 24-48 hours before the actual hearing date.

Don’t take it read Roger. Making clear sense of the site isn’t that easy with a variety of interlocutory filings linked to the main case here, but what is clear is that an order has been made to list the main case, as it pertains to creditor plans, on 1 July.

But as I say, that’s just my reading of it.

OK, if this helps the group is called "To Gfinity and beyond", which seems a little ironic today.

Based on what I can see from the NCLT site, it looks to me like the hearing has been set for 1 July.

Cant be 100% certain but pretty close.

Pompal

I have a lot of sympathy with your sentiments and share them to a great extent, especially after today. What disappointed me the most wasn't the raise itself, but the lack of meaningful commercial commentary accompanied by the hefty discount he seemingly had to agree to get the raise away.

Like you say, that smacks of a CEO who currently has nothing he can say, or perhaps disclose.

I am also glad you've enjoyed my research, on which I'd just make two points. First, I have always been clear when things I'm saying offer little more than conjecture - and I phrased my earlier post in exactly the same way. Secondly, it is somewhat galling to take even gentle criticism form someone who has admittedly read and enjoyed what I've said over the last 12-18 months without themselves adding much if anything to the conversation beyond the odd snipe.

A little oddity.

Our sales guy Harry posted on linkedin about his support for a WPP charity event last week. His comment about CIQ and WPP making an impact together drew attention - could have been he meant commercially, or just in support of the charity.

The weird thing is that he appears to have reposted his own post.

Make of it what you will, but it seems pretty odd to me. Might be a mistake. Might be he's trying to hammer home a WPP relationship that as of now he's restricted from disclosing.

DH has said to expect UK revenue in June. So thats over the next 2 weeks. WPP is a UK company.

Don't read too much into this, its odd but likely innocuous.

Look, I'm angry and disappointed by the news today but totally agree with you S1L3NT.

DH hasn't given any market update since September last year other than commentary in general reporting cycle stuff, or the raise today. And the issue with the commentary he has given is that there is very little meat on the bones and, in truth, what we got today hasn't really moved the dial from where we were in September or even May last year. That's not to say the dial hasn't moved - its just that we don't know.

I maintain that the opportunity here is huge. The problem is that as of now we are seeing little to evidence CIQ is capitalising on it, and we don't even know how good it is or how it compares to its peers. This is stuff DH could tell us - he just doesn't.

Hi disregard for shareholder comms is a massive problem here.

But I am riding this out.