Member Info for Sister8

Could this 2nd upgrade of PT explain the absence of certain negative posters lately, either that or the complex use of vocabulary I displayed last night has got them cowering under their bedsit duvets.

Oddly enough, I posted a completely rational post last night, no obscenities or expletives therein and low and behold the post has been removed!

I actually take its removal as a compliment, as it were obviously way too perplex in its construction for the narrow minded persons that read it and even more so for those that it clearly touched a nerve with.

I will email admin later today and request that the said post be reinstated as it did not breach any of the T&Cs regarding posting on this site. If that were the case then at least 70% of the posts on this forum in particular would have needed to be removed yet they have not been.

I am just glad if that by coincidence or not, my arrival as a long term shareholder of San Leon has had the desired effect and we now see the negative posts abating in their number and hopefully the board can now get back to a prophetic state of equilibrium.

I did read somewhere that in its unrisked form, San Leons sum of parts share price equated to over 1400p per share, although I cannot remember where I viewed the info.

S8

sorry matt, nowhere did I see in your previous post you stating you were invested in IGG. I thought you were merely bragging that whilst IG Index win the bets 79% of the time against their clients (their homepage has a disclaimer stating that 79% of persons that have an account with IG lose all their money), you were one of the 21% that win. So you could say that you and your 21% collective along with IGs 79% are 100% winners.

I dont think we stand a chance do we?

So to clarify matt, you are saying every bet you place with IG you win, is that right?

I could not help notice some large buys go through today and cannot help but think its someone trying to prop the price up, maybe its Goldmans lending them a helping hand before the inevitable?

Stranger things have happened I guess and I did note somewhere that GS are actually shareholders in IGG, theres a surprise not...

Like I said, IMO it will take another 2 quarters for the lackof "punters" profits to bite deep into IGGs profits from revenues. I wouldnt be short just yet.

If this goes above 10 im putting the ranch on a short.

Good luck matt, the brave!

S8

now that most seem to have made up your narrow minds, from now on can I please be addressed as squirrel 4 ?

S8

good evening to you redeyemines. Having skimmed through your post, I totally agree with your sentiments and you have probably landed on the edge of the cats and the bullseye with your dart of thought...Its a bit late in the day to drum up another laborious post on this subject but I shall get one penned by the end of the week in response to yours.

Being semi retired I have considerable time on my hands to devote to worthy causes (outside of the charities I run) and I cannot think of a better way to use it than to proffer some commentary providing as much insight into this subject as possible, as I belive, as you have rightly pointed out that there is more to the demise of San Leons share price than meets the eye.

I am waiting in earnest for the outcome of the ongoing coutcase between Mr Peter Quinn V IG Index, as IMHO the verdict could set a precedence for future cases that may be taken up by persons who too have lost considerable sums spreadbetting.

What I find rather odd is that this court case is quite a substantial matter, for IGG and its shareholders, much more significant than the fly in the oitment case that may or may not be bought about by Sun Trust against San Leon, yet amazingly there has not been one single post about it by any IGG shareholders to date and all the while the IGG share price has been rising since the court case started, you couldnt make it up could you?

On another note, IGG seems to be very good at what they do, as it lnow ets you know in advance (due to new legislations) that 79% of people that open an account and trade with them lose all of their money, not just part of it but ALL of it!!

On that bombshell, im off to bed.

To be continued...

S8

I have been thinking long and hard about the spread betting industry and have come to the conclusion (which at present is only my conclusion and my opinion) if there were recourse for those that were sold or rather mis sold PPI, then surely there must be recourse for the punter and some form of legal ramifications for the provider.

From what I have quickly read on the internet regarding persons that were lured into opening a spread betting account, they were either given a cash reward incentive upon signing up and or deposit X amount and we will give you Y amount on top. If true (my limited research for now suggests this was the case) then how is that not enticing persons to gamble? Especially, when at the time they did not have the disclaimer stating that 79% of people who open an account lose all their money, I am sure that had the punters been made aware of this somehow NOT minor detail before they opened their accounts I wonder how many would have passed on the offer, cash reward or no cash reward?

I find it rather incredulous that the FCA have not looked at these companies closer, as I am sure I do not stand alone in thinking many a punter has been parted of their monies soon after both opening a spread betting account and taking up the cash reward offer. Further still, as with PPI I am also shocked that whilst bringing into force new regulations, they did not (at least thus far) open up the way for ex clients whom think they too were duped or lured into losing their money with the right to demand compensation for any losses, either in ffull or in part against the said company.

Could this bill be forthcoming or in true FCA style will they turn a blind eye to what was previous while attempting to keep check on the current state of play?

Shorting this stock could be similar to Christian Bale shorting sub prime mortgages back in the day as I really struggle to see where the next spurt of growth at IGG in particular will come from.

I guess to find out I will need to put my money where my mouth is, and as in the Big Short, timing will be everything!

S8

of course I believe the rise is on, its there for all to see.

My concern or should I say hope is that it continues and never abates.

Reading constant negativity can sometimes put a dampner on ones mood, equally, reading constant positivity can give one false hopes too!

Its all about balance quel, as I am sure you full well know. Too mush or too little of either is never a good thing.

I have just had a few hours free on my hands researching other oil stocks today and had I have invested in almost any one of the five I researched I would have been a happy chappess....instead I invested in San Leon (unfortunately on someone elses advice who turns out was a stocks and shares con man) and here I am picking up the pieces with only hope and some'good commentry from the likes of blue and alaric.

Its not really my favoured way to invest, I would usually expect my investments BoD to bring some positivity and news to the throw, yet its often the way that I always end up hearing the bad news first in the Sunday Times or from the squirrels!!

Say what you like about them, up until now (I have gone over many many of their posts) they have always been right and to say that does pain me somewhat but its the truth and we all want the truth about the company we invest in do we not Quel?

I have also studied some of your posts and whilst most of the time you seem like the average investor, I cannot help but think at other times, by some of your posts I couldnt put my hand on my heart and say what side of the fence you are truly talking from either.

I wish all here, including myself the best of luck and I sincerely hope an inflection point has either been reached or is not too far away, for all our sakes.

On a darker note, what worries me more than the negative posters is that a 50% premium to current share price would mean Tosca could take us over now for 37p, or anyone else for that matter. I also do not buy the Tosca would never do this theory either as at the end of the day he is just another fund manager looking for a "nut" no offence or reference to the squirrels intended.

Fingers crossed Quel.

ATB

S8

I do not agree one bit with the banal and vexatious way in which the squirrels express their resentment towards this company, However, I cannot (even with the barrage of positive counter posts) help but agree with the fact that anyone invested before the 100/1 (yes I have my hand up in the back row) let alone since, has been on the receiving end of a right old stinker of an investment.

If only these characters were not so nefarious and darn right obnoxious, their rants would actually provide some semblance to this stock, which through right or wrong reasons has behaved like a real dog of the years stock!

Nigerian bigging up of solicitors aside, they are correct (however much it pains me to say it) that this company has indeed been an absolutely awful investment over an 8 year period and continues to be so today.

Yes, I hear what bluerill and alaric are saying but the fact of the matter is, unless you were lucky enough to buy enough around the 20p level, most are suffering losses (some have losses so huge even the optimist I am can never see them haviing a return back on their initial investment)

Again, (sorry guys) when Avobone entered the fray, I remember reading here that they would never win, they didnt stand a chance we said, well the fact is they did and a few short months after Tosca was given the chance to get his average down yet again by putting his hand in his pocket to pay off the Avobone debacle, here we are in limbo with ST, yes I know its all good reading blues and alarics upbeat posts but I cannot help but think, WHAT IF "they" are right yet again, what if ST somehow come out on top and Tosca gets the chance to get his average down again, what then?

If I were to say I fully believe its just another pantomine (like I assumed with Avobone) I would be lying, if I were to say I am not the slightest bit aggrieved by this latest saga I would also be lying. Whilst we can all assume their is no merit to ST (as we all did with Avobone) unfortunately the squirrels do have valid point and it also seems that the market, rightly or wrongly agrees with them.

This post is by no means an admission that I believe they are right but it also is not an admission that I believe its all plain sailing from here and ST will just go away.

Also and what baffles me most is that all this time Tosca just sit back and keep throwing more money at us. Most other stocks Tosca have held large stakes in, by now he would have been ranting and raving and calling for change and heads to roll. Does he have a master plan of his own or does he have an agenda to fulfill.

Finally, whilst Osin takes a fair wedge of his salary in shares, why has neither he or anyone else ever put their hand in their pockets and bought, there is no way there has not been a time when it would be deemed non inside to purchase shares, yet for as long as I can remember nobody from the company has.

I wish I had of just stayed a reader and not a contributor..

S8

yes, quite mfdoom, the 79% as you say will not be able to aford to go again as the new margin requirements simply wont allow them to!

I am not quite sure of the exact timescale as to when it will really bite deep into IGGs profits but for sure the inflection point is now.

I also take exception to matt the brave calling people he does not even know idiots, thats just the type of behaviour a real idiot would display. I also find it rather odd why he is defending IG index so much, he seems to know an awful lot about their business model for a "punter"....

The question begs, once the 79% have been "rinsed" and are out the game for good, or at least not in the game with any meaningful amounts to add significant profits to IG, who will they go after then? the other 21% maybe...poor matt, he obviously does not know what hes go coming does he?

I think 900p is a very good entry to build a short position but perhaps they may give it one last hike up before hand so I would not be certain that this is the top just yet.

Another question is, if as matt says IG are not the ones that rinse the client, all they take is the spread, then who exactly are the rinsers?

Perhaps matt can let us know?

S8

so is that a no to becoming an honorary member of your imaginary team rampit club sid? i did say please.

Oh, and just another gentle reminder sid, have you noticed the share price increase since I started to post? coincidence perhaps.

S8

I hope Mr Quinn wins his case as then the flood gates will be rammed open for more litigation seekers whom suspect they too were "rinsed"

I guess what with the internal emails being read out in court, an ex IG employee must have gained access to these as I hardly think Peter Hetherington brought them to court in a brown envelope andgave them to the judge?

Whatever, it all seems a bit fishy to me. If there were only the spread made on trades put on through these companies, then why were the emails showing so much exitement about him punting like a demon and saying he will probably lose all a potential refund they were going to offer him anyway?

Surely if they only make money on the clients spread, would it not be more logical for them to keep him in the game, as when he is rinsed they get no more benefit apparently. Seems odd to me they would treat a big punter that way, unless of course they get a share of his losses once he is busted.

Certainly an eye opener, what with this new legislation surrounding leverage that was put into force this month. One does have to wonder if or not companies such as this one have their best days already behind them.

The case is on its 4th day tomorrow and obviously cannot be going all IG Markets way, by that I mean its not a clear cut case of punters own fault.

S8

yes sid, my holding has been rounded to 278p per share. I hold.so far 8655 shares to be exact (as I know you like exactness)

Have you a problem with that sid? are you going to call me names and tell me what a silly man I am?

Yet instead of being a perpetual pessimist such as yourself, I will endeavour to take advantage of the stocks current low price and get a better average. If I buy the same amount of share again my average comes down to below 130p (SP Angels quoted risked price) and then if I decide to double up on that all of a sudden I will get to an average of circa 65p, then im right back in the game sid am I not.

Meanwhile, I will let you spend your days sat here churning out your negativity to the unsuspecting, whining on about how hard done by you are since investing in San Leon, taking all that pent up bitterness out on anyone that dare say they are invested in San Leon or will buy more shares in San Leon. The list of negitivity goes on sid as I am sure you are well aware, its just getting so glaringly obvious to those actually invested here that your underlying motives are anything but shareholder related.

Seek help sid before its too late.

One last question sid, have you noticed the rise in share price since I started to post? come on, dont make me feelleft out, can I not be part of your imaginary team rampit please?

S8

typical, I take the time to post and have just received a call back from the many brokers I rang earlier and they said they can buy shares on my behalf in San Leon.

Incidently they asked if I was interested in buying them on a spread bet as the initial outlay would be far less, I retorted and told them if their odds of losing are 79% like IG Markets states on their website home page then thanks, but no thanks!!

I find it egregious that faced with the fact you have such a low odds of making money using leverage that people still go for it, especially when the company is openly telling you your going to lose!

As bluerill said yesterday, it takes all kinds to make the World and he sure is right.

S8

if anyone could help me in my search for a reliable share dealing no thrills, no fuss account. I would be most greatful.

I wish to add to my holding of San Leon and my present broker (who I will not name) says he cannot purchase shares in San Leon for some odd reason and that I can only sell them? All rather confusing if you ask me.

Please do not recommend IG Markets as I have just noticed that they are currently being sued for 2m regarding what their ex client explains as unethical. If anyone is interested further on this matter I have pasted on the IGG board my findings about the ongoing court case.

Perhaps sid got wind of this and is no longer interested in the demise of San Leon and instead has pounced on IGGs current misfortunes?

As an aside, if I were of the same nast nature of sid and his share antics I would certainly start to spread fear on IGG as at 900p that to my inexperienced market view is one to watch for a big short.

S8

Mr Quinn is claiming at least £2m in losses and damages in the civil case, which comes weeks after European regulators introduced tough restrictions on trading sites. The rules include reductions in the amount traders can borrow to increase their bets, as well as a ban on offering traders bonuses or other benefits if they open accounts.

Mr Quinn said IG had “worked very hard to rinse [him]”, presenting as evidence emails in which IG employees described Mr Quinn as “punting like a demon” and said “he will no doubt trade and lose” a cash refund they were considering giving him.

“IG promotes the fact they want their clients to have the best possible outcomes but then behind the scenes works like a bookmaker,” Mr Quinn told the court. “The point is you’re not William Hill, you’re an FCA [Financial Conduct Authority] registered business.”

The case continues.

Sorry that link appears broken, here is the text from the FT

IG Index fights claim it encouraged ‘risky’ trades

Customer sues after losing at least £2m making spread bets between 2010 and 2014

IG Index, Europe’s largest online trading website, appeared in court on Tuesday to fight a claim that it encouraged a UK businessman to place “risky” trades that were “against his best interests”, wooing him with hospitality and gifts.

Peter Quinn, a Manchester-based businessman, is suing IG after he lost at least £2m making spread bets via IG between 2010 and 2014.

Spread bets allow traders to borrow money to bet on the price movements of underlying assets such as shares or currencies, without having to own them. Inexperienced traders can lose a lot of money through spread betting, making it the focus of a recent regulatory clampdown.

Mr Quinn has accused IG of failing to adequately test the appropriateness of the products for him when he first opened his account with no previous spread betting experience, or at any later date.

According to his claim, IG staff also “induced” him to continue spread betting after he had started to suffer big losses and demonstrated a “propensity to gamble”, by gifting him wines and inviting him to racing events for example.

IG denies any wrongdoing, saying in court documents that any damage suffered by Mr Quinn was “wholly caused and/or contributed to by [his] negligence” when he chose to place the bets of his own accord.

According to IG’s defence, Mr Quinn understood the risks he was taking and underwent a proper “onboarding” assessment. This included signing a customer agreement and agreeing that he had read the company’s risk disclosures.

Giving evidence on Tuesday, Bridget Messer, IG’s chief commercial officer, told the court it was not IG’s duty to stop a client “who understands the risks [and] knows what he’s doing” from trading based on “whether or not he is a bad or a good trader”.

She said that Mr Quinn had not undergone a further appropriateness test at a later point when his account was upgraded, but that he would have passed this had he done so.

While the company invited Mr Quinn to events and lunches, this also did not break any rules, IG said. Peter Hetherington, chief executive of IG, attended the hearing on Monday and Tuesday.

https://www.ft.com/content/9e405066-a54e-11e8-8ecf-a7ae1beff35b

I was searching the internet of things just now for a new share dealing account when I stumbled upon a fresh article in the FT, it relates to a current court case whereby an ex client is suing IG for 2M in damages as he claims IG Index "rinsed" him and induced him into making trades, by the sound of it most of them trades (induced or otherwise) lost.

Oddly enough I have just searched the IG welcome page and I am oustounded to read on it a warning that says 79% of accounts lose money with this company, how bizzare is that, they are actually telling you that even before you start to place bets with them that you only stand a 21% chance of winning? Who on earth would even open an account with them when you already have it from the horses mouth that there is a very very high probability you will lose your money?

I will post the link to the trial of IG Index, more worrying is, what will happen to the share price of this company should they lose? will it not then set a precedent for others to come forward and claim the same, similar to PPI claims?

I am surprised there has been nothing said on this board so I thought I would be the first to mention it and I also think I will avoid opening an account with this company, sharedealing or otherwise.

S8

animal sid? Can I not play a mammal in your game please?

I guess ones loss is only as big as their holding here. Forunately, I am an adult and therefore take responsibility for my actions, unlike some on here who instead choose to blame anyone and everyone else.

Can I ask you sid, were you forced to buy shares in San Leon?

S8

spacecenter (did I spell that incorrectly too?)

Thank you in advance for alerting me to your role as resident train spotter. I hope you never threw stones when the driver never sounded his horn?

As bluerill rightly stated, "it takes all types to make the World".

Now, shall we get back to San Leon?

S8

First post from me, so I will endeavour to keep it short and sweet.

From a long term shareholders opinion, ( 278p in old money) whilst at times watching the fisty cuffs behind the bike sheds may be amusing (especially when the class bully constantly gets schooled), I have to say that I find it incredulous that the instigators sole purpose here is anything other than a distraction technique from the bigger picture being painted here.

The rhetorical diatribe emanating from their keyboards astounds me. `It is reminiscent of the "brave" elepahnt tamer whom taunts and pokes the stricken creature whilst heavily chained, in his attempt to make it perform unatural tasks.

As promised, I have kept it short and sweet and will revert back about the elephants in a subsequent post.

FYI, I have all ready worked out who is who in the zoo here, so please, unless its San Leon related do not go there with your retorts or multiple ID accusations etc etc, as it will just end in you being on the receiving end of another good old fashioned schooling!

S8