Member Info for Spikeyj

I had a ZX80, with additional RAM pack … blast from the past… ZX81 a bit too new-fangled for me.

Me, i was guessing the excuse might something along the lines of the agent needing to enhance the security protocols of the payment portal, following the attempted assassination of trump. or maybe something like, needing to work closely with NASA to synchronise notification timings, as a rock from oort cloud spotting unexpectedly transecting neptunian orbital plane.

- as HITS notes, the supposed legal bar to announcing DaaP before notifications out is a wonky one that stores up many potential excuses … very odd the idea that it could be legal to announce DaaP on 31/7, two days after notifications supposedly go to ** paper certificate** holders, but apparently it doesn’t seem to matter at all if or ever holders with nominee holdings ever get notified — strange law, that.

… just one further thought about amitcigar’s claims …

*IF* (lol!) one were to take seriously his claim that he bought 26,000,000 shares from a “distressed seller” at 0.1p, that makes an interesting counterpoint to the assertion that’s been made by various rampers over the last few years, that there are some large outstanding shorts who are desperate to buy cloudtag shares in order to close their shorts.

{mind you, to be fair, i don’t believe a word on the cloudtag website anyway, so the list of so-called significant shareholders may well be very far from accurate, *cough*.

i would not take for granted either that there are only a billion shares in issue, given the track record about how truthful / accurate all the various updates turn out to be.

as ever with cloudtag, there’s no way to independently verify any of this .. he might have sold 2 billion shares already, so far as anyone can tell, or pretty much any number.]

Wow, 26 million shares plus “tens of more millions shares” — and all that without being on the significant shareholders list! —- he has more that the hargreaves lansdown nominee account.

… curious too who would have sold him 26 million shares, since according to cloudtag’s own website, there actuallly was no such individual holder with that many, other than amit himself and osuna ltd — all still has the strong whiff of a billy b***-s****er imv.

as for “…which Amit will have to respect”, just LOL!!!

?eh?

chat another time, dougie, when you’ve calmed down and want to talk about the company again.

08:39, it would be nice to think so, but as winnie-the-pooh has been finding (as canute too long ago) leaders just saying they want something to happen doesn’t make it so — honorary exception of course for captain picard.

(& once again, dougie, you are confusing highlighting the idiocy or mendacity of others, which I will happily do, where relevant, versus taking pleasure in their losses, which i do not —- different issues.)

You missed out the words, “hundreds of thousands of pounds” from your quote, dougie. —- i was highlighting that amitscigar is lying on this chatboard about his cloudtag purchasing.

far too many folks already telling porkies on here, ranging from davidgreece, aberdeenman and mrselfridge back in the day, through to mrcoffee, hubba and 1984 more recently.

( if amitscigar really had spent several hundred thousand pounds on cloudtag shares, then boy oh boy that really would have been a spectacularly f***wit stupid thing to do!… but i don’t believe he did - hence imv it’s more about his dishonesty rather than being just daft.)

I think you are simply posting about your own rather over-emotional fantasies, dougie.

… very happy to discuss cloudtag with you if/when you are in the mood to do that, rather than lapse into bellicosity yet again.

bye for now.

Assuming you mean me, what on earth would I be worried about, dougie??

… i have no stake in cloudtag, neither long nor short, so would not be a party to any actions. it literally makes no personal difference to me whether holders do or don’t try to pursue amit for his various alleged failings, tho’ in principle i do think the investment universe would be a better place without amit, and at a very general level i prefer honest and polite folks to prosper more than those who are not.

you’re been very fond of using this ‘schadenfreude’ term recently. i think you may be misunderstanding - i do indeed think that you are gullible, stupid and rude, but that does *not* mean that i take any pleasure in your financial losses with cloudtag - i have no personal connection with you, and so i don’t mind one way or the other whether you win or lose money on stocks and shares.

In which case that earlier question about the location of amit’s assets would be very relevant.

note particularly, the issue would not be about amit’s location, but that the location of his *assets*, which is a different matter altogether. amit has had many years to plan and organise around his asset distribution very, very carefully.

“Assuming they find no funds, the US counsel seemed quite keen on chasing litigation.”

… but if there are no funds to begin with, then how would the “US counsel” get paid for their work? - who would pay them, and with what??

Re 14:37, point 2, anyone tempted to emulate dougie should bear in mind that it is often ruinously expensive to attempt a defence against a libel action.

imo most ordinary pis should be very wary of posting material that could be seen as defamatory of shlomo, who has no obvious evidenced connection with cloudtag whatsoever, and has pretty deep pockets.

One of the possible advantages of seeking criminal action in these kind of cases is that the burden of costs does *not* lie with the victims (even if verdict is eventually not guilty) … rather, the relevant prosecuting authority would bear the costs.

and if the aim of many is somehow to ‘punish’ amit, rather than necessarily get their money back, then criminal route is well suited to that —- but the burden of proof significantly higher for criminal prosecution vs civil actions. also, even after a successful criminal action, there is a further, separate high bar to overcome, whether or not courts would agree to issue a compensation order.

… note also, if a criminal route is pursued, then it is a matter for the prosecuting authority to consider whether or not to freeze or injunct assets (e.g. under POCA), i.e. not a choice for the alleged victims to make.

Re 14:21, i think part of antha’s point is that if legal beagles don’t think it is very likely that funds actually exist, then it is very highly unlikely that such legal beagles would want to take on such work on a no-win / no-fee basis — no point conducting an action for a percentage of the payout, if there is nothing to be paid out.

[soz, meant, ‘seeking redress’, not ‘seeming redress’.]

An interesting weblink considering some of the pros and cons of folks seeming redress thro’ civil vs criminal action regarding any alleged fraud:

https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/services/department/dispute-resolution/civil-fraud-and-investigations/fraud-civil-vs-criminal-faqs#:~:text=In%20civil%20proceedings%20the%20burden,defendant%20committed%20the%20alleged%20fraud.

…note how civil proceedings are more within the control of the alleged victim(s), have a lower burden of proof, tend to have shorter timescales, and are significantly more focused on financial redress for the alleged victim.

“Provided that Amit has not been using updates to try to persuade holders to buy shares in recent years …”

yup, that’s the key issue — do those huge deal funds actually exist, and if they don’t, were those updates claiming otherwise used to persuade pis to hand over more money.

22:05: “Establishing the existence of any funds, and in locating, would then be and the risk of it all being just a con, with nowt for the legal team, is then offset in a successful distribution.”

eh? - english next time, please.

… looking back to the ‘significant shareholders’ section under the securities information tab of CTAG’s own website, there are four broker accounts for nominee holdings named as having 25 million or more shares, but only one individual entity other than amit himself — that’s the listing for osuna ltd, shown as 30,975,000 shares as at 8/9/20.

that might be the same osuna ltd shown on companies house as having beneficial owner being a singorean guy called mr wong, but there are other companies also using that name so it’s not clear.

unless amitscigar is that fellah from osuna, it’s very odd that he owns such a huge amount of cloudtag shares but was not listed by the company as being a significant shareholder.