Member Info for New_2_LSE2018

Does that mean that if enough of us demand a poll on that resolution then a poll has to be held??

Nice to see posts getting removed that are asking simple questions, hey ho what to do

Well Rosewall seen as you know so much do enlighten us, seems rather underhand isn’t it to do something by proxy and as it didn’t meet desired outcome to then go for a show of hands at the AGM, big of course this is AST and of course CH and CC are always right. There is a lot that can be done but ethically and morally is it correct to do, this sort of behaviour is what allows rouge elements to get a footing as the BOD behave unethically to start with. All just imho and like I said at the start just doesn’t fill you with confidence with this BOD...

It looks like they went for the vote for hands as only resolution 5 and 6 were defeated on proxy, was it really worth risking his job to get them passed? I mean what if the people there had voted against his re-election???

Not sure why my post was deleted was asking a question? So wait if people had voted against re-election of someone at the AGM the company can choose to take the proxy votes instead? Surely it has to be either and set before the AGM not mix and match???

Cheers TPT, 5 was more against but then passed via a show of hands at the AGM? Is that correct??

Might send Colin an email asking what the number of votes for and against each resolution was? Surely they have to keep a record of them details as how the motions / resolutions were agreed and carried forward.,,,

I’m still confused by how the re-election was done, by show of hands or actual proxy votes cast? Is it one vote per shareholder or the number of shares you have influenced it??? Corrupt....

Whilst we at it, why is there no official RNS on PG11A stuck tool saga, was quick enough to issue the killer blow when the SP needed killing, but now? Oh no that can’t be done as would actually improve the SP, I rest my case. Imho....

Oh man. Companies survive by ensuring today is looked at as well as tomorrow, jam tomorrow doesn’t pay the bills and doesn’t show progress being made, investing in the future, what’s happened here, stating IPPC isn’t priority to the market, okay market thinks ah they will be selling massive amounts of untreated gas as well then, erm no, whilst we at it let’s screw up one of the wells that we are producing gas from, well done, the market obviously has massive amounts of confidence in this BOD on that past performance. All imho..,,,

Money made and then squandered without any progress taking the company forward is the issue. We should have money in the bank and be using it to open more wells and increase sales of the raw asset if we cannot sell clean gas, but again CH knows best and the SP shows how much confidence the market has in the clown, on top of that this risk of a placing being banded about is adding fuel to the fire, if he does a placing just goes to show that all the bull he was spouting was for re-election. All imho....

Didn’t take a genius to work that one out.... CH is a parasite on this company, imho. Those who jump to his defence oh he found a route to market, whoop de flipping whoop, he did his job which he’s paid more that people are paid for running a whole country, that’s food for thought.... all imho....

Now the AGM is done and dusted and the fatcat salaries are protected there won’t be any engagement, go on CH prove me wrong.... all imho

Job done, got re-elected, now will slip back into his coma.... all imho.... all the SR bull was just to keep us hanging on, waste of effort CH is... all imho....

Different agendas, here pummelling and eroding shareholder value, there they actually want to re-assure shareholders, CH and CC hang your heads in shame.... all imho....

Amazing letter, and that’s a BOD who don’t want to pummel the sp, we have CH sticking more tools down the well, maybe he should fall in it himself.... all imho. But no that Thor mining, might actually invest there myself, BOD who are alive at least....

Resolution 5 - 3 million pounds worth of shares, to existing shareholders... which means not you snake.... imho

Erm I posted positive that CH would have a get out clause come on, I asked him about the stuck tool and his excuse was oh didn’t think it was important to tell anyone, past form. Have no short. Have a massive paper loss I live and hope breaks even then I can sell off, and forget all CH lies, so yeah I hope it does materialise, but am also realistic of the past false promises so I wouldn’t believe anything that comes out of CH mouth, hope that clears it up. And I posted positive that they can’t dilute hell out of the share without first offering to existing shareholders.... all imho....

Correct me if I’m wrong, 6 was to issue shares to anyone without offering to shareholders first (mates rates maybe) and that got squashed, 5 was in case needed offer first to existing shareholders in proportion to existing shareholding, in your case snake zero holding so why you even care is beyond me... all imho....

Ten, will believe it when I see it, CH porkies again, will then say actually 9 of them weren’t interested but their rejection letter was stuck in the post along with the tool... imho