Stefan Bernstein explains how the EU/Greenland critical raw materials partnership benefits GreenRoc. Watch the full video here.
@ Slownsteady
Where did I say that statement was about one demographic only? Pretty sure I didn't?
Are you saying because I am born British, I can't believe taking lives for political reasons is not ok? Strange logic.
SETS is more liquid than SETSqx
SETS is electronic order book driven, whereas SETSqx is MM driven. SETS is far better for traders as movement is easier.
Looks like they are expecting SYME to become very liquid and are looking to allow this movement to become easier for the participants. Whether that will open it up to CFD's and Spreadbets, not sure, but SETs is the norm for that.
MRRR
SYME are regulated by DTR.
DTR 4.1.3 regulation ensures a company who abide by DTR have to release their AR 4 months after their financial year end. As SYME year end is 31 Dec, AR must be produced by 31 Apr
https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/DTR/4/1.html.
For notes, companies house website never states DTR thresholds, only standard thresholds, so will state accounts due by end of June, which is technically incorrect.
Get on that report button guys, lets see if we can break the record, because trying to supress information is the key to a good investment strategy (maybe when this is all said and done, some may want the information I have).
A post of mine from Jan 2022. Looks like I'm finally going to be able to write the last chapter very soon.
"
Napalm012
Posted in: SYME
Posts: 667
Price: 0.145
No Opinion
RE: Baltic Exchange and Tradeflow13 Jan 2022 09:54
Some of you are starting to go down the right avenues now!
A little off topic, but, everyone likes a story
I used to know someone, we had a shared interest outside of our careers, we also had a third friend.
I lost contact with the first friend in the group.
Luckily the second friend was about to reacquaint us, and it only cost me a beer for him to do so.
The three of us ended up having a lovely meal together.
Anyhow, where was I?
Oh yeah, what business have Parvizal done since..."
I see the required independent valuation report is still not visible on who actually valued TF in the first place....
Someone is going to have to explain to me incredibly slowly, so I understand, that even if you disagree with a foreign government, its policies and actions, how anyone can justify another nation dropping indiscriminate bombs on the general population, which includes children (and adults) who have no impact, say or influence, on that said countries policies and actions.
Whatever you watch on YouTube, or any other form of influenced social media, if you are ok with destruction of innocent life, I'd say your moral compass is facing in a direction which is backward to say the least.
Stalin
No disrespect taken, but, I've been trading SYME for over a year. It doesn't matter if you sit at your screen 24/7 and don't blink, nobody can accurately tell buys and sells, unless your the person doing the transaction.
Anyone stating otherwise is chatting bubbles.
So do I Stalin
And I fully know that no human eye can follow the millisecond transaction changes of bid/ask, and most algorithms can't either. So please don't try and BS me with that!
The price action since Friday has been pure manipulation, and traders are doing extremely well from it, because it's so blatant. Both the rises and the falls are been controlled by an as yet unknown entity, but no one sitting at their desk can say 100% what the accurate data is.
That's not correct, at all.
It is supply and demand, but think of it like an auction. if there are more buyers than sellers, the mm's raise the price to attract current holders to sell, and vice versa. There can't be double the amount of sellers to buyers, and the same the opposite side around.
the mm's job is to attract both buyers and sellers into the market and keep transactions rolling.
It doesn't matter about buyers and sellers netting off (because they always will), what matters is the prices where people will buy or sell.
Fridays rise was simply high demand for shares, so mm's made it attractive to holders/traders who had shares to sell, and ensured price raised
Todays fall is more sellers than buyers, so mm's have lowered prices to attract demand from new buyers.
Both circumstances still amount to a seller and a buyer for every single share bought and sold.
No
and I have no open position
I have had many open positions during the past year, all fueled from AZ statements and dates.
I have done very well out of SYME by simply riding expectations and taking everything that AZ said as BS.
Hope that's clear.
Plus, with all due respect, you stating anyone has persistent lack of understanding is pretty laughable.
Trevor
Who audits private companies accounts worldwide?
I'll give you a clue, well answer really, auditors. Now here is the earth shattering news, auditors audit companies and apply accounting standards to said audit. They don't allow you to do what you want with the transaction, just because you want to put it there. Because if they do, the auditor gets a good slap on the wrist.
Peakhope
enjoy.
https://www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/meetings/2019/july/iasb/ap30d-smes-review.pdf
Control is when you have autonomy over the use and benefits of an asset and preventing others from using and obtaining benefits from the asset. To answer you question fully, I'd need to see each and every T&C regarding a sale. I will say this with certainty, if the T&C declares you have no right to do anything with said good, and the only action you can take is return its ownership to the original customer, no, it would not be classed as a real sale.
No, i don't
SYME have always stated the business transfers the stock to a funder, but the stock remains with the manufacturer, and the stock is transferred back to the manufacturer at the manufacturers chosen point. At no point does the funder have the right to resell the inventory on (or even touch the inventory).
You have the business model wrong, if it was a model where the funder gained control, yes granted, would be legal. But it would be a moot point as there would not be one single customer to ever accept those terms.
Ginger
I showed you the article from a SYME member of staff....
"The SME has no obligation to buy it back, thereby passing the risk and reward of the inventory to the funder. Hence it is a true sale and can be recognised as such in the accounts even under IFRS."
so you are saying a manufacturer will sell £100k of stock to a funder for £85k, and pass the control, risk and reward to the funder?? So legally, the funder can do what it wants with that stock, and there is no legal obligiations that stock has to be returned. What???
Here's a proposition for you Ginger, can you send me £1k by bank transfer and i'll happily send you £850 in return. I'm taking it you're good with the deal, as that is what you believe the SYME business model is?
Trevor
I was making a point, do you want me to list all relevant countries tax authorities? Surely if you've found out by email, that your customer base has gone from essentially the whole world, to now just SME companies, and those not under IFRS jurisdictions, you may demand answers from SYME? UAE companies have auditors too by the way.
And finally, for this notion that IFRS and IFRS for SME is totally different, here is the ISAB staff paper on the issue, again, probably another group of people that in SYMEs holders mind don't understand the business model.
https://www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/meetings/2019/july/iasb/ap30d-smes-review.pdf
Trevor
But all auditors abide by them, just because you're a private company doesn't mean you can put transactions where you want to, also HMRC are normally quite interested in the correct standards being used.
Remember, auditors are regulated.
Peakhope
IFRS 15
"To recognise revenue under IFRS 15, an entity applies the following five steps:
identify the contract(s) with a customer.
identify the performance obligations in the contract. Performance obligations are promises in a contract to transfer to a customer goods or services that are distinct.
determine the transaction price. The transaction price is the amount of consideration to which an entity expects to be entitled in exchange for transferring promised goods or services to a customer. If the consideration promised in a contract includes a variable amount, an entity must estimate the amount of consideration to which it expects to be entitled in exchange for transferring the promised goods or services to a customer.
allocate the transaction price to each performance obligation on the basis of the relative stand-alone selling prices of each distinct good or service promised in the contract.
recognise revenue when a performance obligation is satisfied by transferring a promised good or service to a customer (which is when the customer obtains control of that good or service). A performance obligation may be satisfied at a point in time (typically for promises to transfer goods to a customer) or over time (typically for promises to transfer services to a customer). For a performance obligation satisfied over time, an entity would select an appropriate measure of progress to determine how much revenue should be recognised as the performance obligation is satisfied."
Source
https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ifrs-15-revenue-from-contracts-with-customers/
IFRS SME
"Recognition – sale of goods: An entity shall recognise revenue from the sale of goods when all the following conditions are satisfied:
(a) the entity has transferred to the buyer the significant risks and rewards of ownership of the goods.
(b) the entity retains neither continuing managerial involvement to the degree usually associated with ownership nor effective control over the goods sold.
(c) the amount of revenue can be measured reliably.
(d) it is probable that the economic benefits associated with the transaction will flow to the entity.
(e) the costs incurred or to be incurred in respect of the transaction can be measured reliably."
Source
https://www.iasplus.com/en/standards/other/ifrs-for-smes
Please highlight the differences for me?
PWC have done so here, obviously, they've somehow missed the massive differences which occur when recognising revenue, someone needs to tell them.. https://viewpoint.pwc.com/dt/us/en/pwc/accounting_guides/ifrs_and_us_gaap_sim/ifrs_and_us_gaap_sim_US/chapter_16_ifrs_for__US/161_ifrs_for_small_a_US.html#pwc-topic.dita_1521022510219768
SYME have massively moved the goalposts, by email, and your all still happy with their excuses. Beggers belief.