RE: Value on offer19 Jan 2025 09:28
Reply to the 00:12 and 07:33 posts.
"This is a good bb where it's possible to debate all sides in a balanced way" - balanced debate?
After I made my first post about political risk, you didn't debate it. You didn't tell me then that someone put the question to Segun Lawson at the recent IMC meeting. You told me that you expected THX to be very profitable. I had never doubted that and that was nothing to do with the point I made. Saying that was a deflection tactic to avoid addressing my point.
I also got some reply (not from you) about the Amazon which isn't even in Africa.
I post information to initiate debate, information which will also be useful to others like me who are not paid to sit all day pumping stocks. I pass on facts - Ashanti happened, ACA happened, this Barrack thing happened. I post facts that you label as "scaremongering". If you had been interested in debate about political risk, you could have mentioned this "The question was answered so feel free to go spend 30 minutes of your precious time to watch the IMC q&a" - and rather than resorting to insulting language, i.e. "to save yourself looking ignorant time and time again", you could have have told me what the answer was - possibly a reassuring answer - that would have been genuine debate, so don't tell me about debate.
You try deflection tactics and now you have dropped the pretence of politeness, your tone is getting harsher. e.g, "If you hadn't just turned up suddenly with your single issue scaremongering you'd know that" - and - "feel free to go spend 30 minutes of your precious time to watch the IMC q&a to save yourself looking ignorant time and time again".
I can see the direction in which your replies are going and that you will soon be quite rude and abusive.
So I post information to initiate debate and all you do is try on tactics and to dismiss valid concerns as scaremongering. To me, this is another clue as to someone being a professional ramper.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
