Member Info for Spikeyj

23:00, makes me wonder if stretch remembers his own post about “pro-putin tools” from 2/4/25 21:37.

Mr warthog, there has indeed been quite a bit going on in the markets globally … actually, AV is getting away with it relatively lightly so far!

…the trumpster is shake, rattle and rolling..

it’s at times like this when one wonders how that porsche fellah is getting on? - you know, the one who is forever popping up on chatboards for UK value stocks to deride them and sing the praises of the US markets. he was sl*gging off AV back when it was around 370s / 380s, but hasn’t had so much to say since it rose 45/50%.

? do you still believe everything else anders said?

You are delusional, gecko.

Evening folks, thanks brenda for resurrecting that old thread for some chuckles and gentle nostalgia. ? where are they now, those amiable fellas like anders, ian, mac, etc?

you are right of course that i have been around on lse years before jub appeared, then disintegrated.

i am careful, for obvious reasons, not to divulge my real identity on these chatboards. i think only one poster has ever managed to guess my professional role correctly, which i think was probably because he was in the same line of business as i am.

… but if you delved back far enough in my posting history, i have previously explained that the ‘j’ in Spikeyj actually stands for ‘John’.

[… hint for the jub conspiracy freaks, lol, my username is not SpikeyA…]

Gecko, i suggest you’d need to ask jub capital about that, not me.

i have never had any position in EUA, neither long nor short.

& i have never had any kind of connection with jub capital.

can’t put it any plainer than that. it’s your issue, not mine, if you choose to believe otherwise.

10:48, that’s the same kind of logic that gecko used to claim the old placing price of 26p was a concrete floor under the EUA share price. … so how did that work out?

and tbf, it’s a logic often used by pis on AIM, the idea that a placing shows where the market can see the real underlying value to a share.

but that’s seldom true on AIM … all that a placing price actually shows is the level at which placing flippers feel fairly confident they can dump into with reasonable liquidity in the very short term.

Tbf, ian_ was better with the graphics.

\____/

|…..|

|…|

|..|

\/

EUA has liftoff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4O_JVcLst6o

Https://www.thetimes.com/article/2ea24da4-d388-41dd-ac37-98476d36acaa?shareToken=a1770d11e386235ada5b888e4d77c99f

22:13, you can’t even get that right, gecko.

21:06, GLG2: “trump has even said zelensky and putin do not like each other…

wow, devastatingly brilliant psychological insight from trump. thanks gecko! … i mean, it’s not like anyone else would ever have figured that out, eh?

“Yes he’s made a few bob selling shares…”

i am unsure whether beretta is being disingenuous, innumerate or just plain naive, although i tend to suspect the first of those.

if we assume for the sake of discussion that there is at least *some* factual basis [LOL] to amit’s statements about how many shares have been issued, then he has issued almost 120 million new CTAG shares over the last 1.5 years, between 9/23 and the most recent update.

if one assumes that he managed to flog those to gullible and greedy punters for an average of 1p each (a figure that’s often popped up from several posters in various chats about his share sales) then that’s roughly £1.2 million pounds over one and a half years.

or, putting it another way, about $1,000,000 per year.

bear in mind that there are virtually zero costs involved for amit, since cloudtag has no meaningful plant, premises, staffing, inventory, storage, R&D, or indeed anything. all it takes amit to run the ctag game is a cheap and clunky godaddy website, plus a few minutes every month to send out some texts and emails to his fan club.

so on the figures above, he’d have been making about $1,000,000 a year as pure profit, for very little work.

one of the persistent stories floated in amit’s defence over the years by his little helpers has been the idea that he can’t be making much from selling extra shares, so why would he bother.

… but $1 million a year, not a trivial motivation, eh?…

{apologies, the relevant post by TBOB was at 09:33, not 09:53, soz}

Stan, TBOB claimed at 09:53 that US institutional investors are “clearly very interested in the company”.

i have been asking what the evidence is for that statement by TBOB.

presumably TBOB is not claiming to have insider information for his assertion, so his 09:53 ought to be based on some kind of evidence in the public domain.

(no need therefore to ask the company to evidence TBOB’s claim, if TBOB was posting truthfully!)

… but the funny thing is, nobody (TBOB included) seems able to explain what the evidence is that US iis are “clearly very interested” …. hmm, not so clear after all, it seems.

in the absence of such evidence, i assume TBOB was simply making it up.

16:56, tbh, i was more hoping for evidence rather than ‘engagement’.

but as per usual, it seems the rampers & stale bulls on this chatboard prefer insults and personal abuse to grown-up, on-topic discussion of the company & its shares.

have a good w/end, all polite and honest folks.

[don’t all rush…]

Perhaps some other kind poster can help TBOB out?

TBOB has claimed that US institutional investors are “clearly interested” in EUA shares.

As evidence, so far he’s been able to cite:

1) CS commenting on US participation in the recent placement …which personally i discount since i view that as merely bucket shop flippers rather than genuine ii investment interest.

2) TBOB has also pointed out that several years ago, there used to be some US iis who held shares …which i think largely reflected index tracking requirements at the time.

? can anyone else help support TBOB’s claim, by providing links etc that evidence current US ii interest in EUA shares? … if there is real evidence out there, i am happy to see it. tia.

TBOB, evidence that US iis used to have holdings *in the past* [e.g as an index constituent when EUA had a much higher mcap] is not evidence that any genuine US institutional investors are “clearly interested” *now*.

i have not said that there is no US ii interest.

but i have said that is no *evidence* to support the idea that there is US ii interest, which you had claimed.

try not to conflate those different ideas.

“… the BoD are finally forced to come clean.”

unlikely for a few years at least, if ever … personally i doubt there will ever really be a moment or full disclosure/revelation … it will just limp on, then fade away …. perhaps a couple more years on AIM, or 2-3 yrs if they are lucky again with placement terms, then delisting here with no more meaningful info provided…. and then it’ll just be a fading memory in london with shareholders trapped in a private co or having to learn new languages for chatting to a more exotic broker.