Member Info for Spikeyj

“If it turns out to be BS, he’s a dead man walking.”

? why?

Bit weird why the supposed ‘buyer’ would want to pay more for the DaaP, given that amit announced quite a while that the deal had already been fully agreed and completed. … ? so they just phoned up one day and said, you know what, amit, i think we’re underpaying you, please can we delay that deal we had already finalised with you in order to pay you even more money, i know it costs us extra money and time, but i’d feel bad if we didn’t …

… if they did manage to sell the ‘concentrate’ [- not convinced it’s as ‘concentrated’ as they might want us to believe - ] they might try to delay announcing how much they manage to sell it for … it’s unclear if they are actually able to sell it at all, but they certainly seem to having great difficulties offloading it which everyone relevant will be well aware of - nobody will do poor old EUA any favours on price when the company is on the ropes like this, the sharks can smell blood in the water.

Del, thank you.

? what has amit ever successfully delivered / achieved with cloudtag over the last 7 years or so that would make you think otherwise even for an instant??

Del, apologies for asking, i know i should remember this but i don’t, brain freeze in old age … could you please remind me the basis /nature of the MT royalty payment, or point me in the direction of the relevant RNS? - tia.

13:18: “Bearing in mind they are a mining company.”

LOL!

New low for amit’s apologists this morning, trying to insinuate that posters who are sceptical of cloudtag are in some way anti-Semitic / anti-israel / pro-hamas. … crass, offensive and inflammatory, particularly given the current ongoing tragic situation in the near east. thank you to LSE admin for deleting the relevant posts so promptly.

Added a couple this morning, medium term view,

“…but hey, I’m no Columbo…”

yeah, that much was obvious a long time ago.

That’s exactly the point, friendsps … the company has *not* explained what the division of costs will be. so i don’t know how costs are being divided, but nor does anyone else who is not an insider to the case.

so someone like lenoman who claims that EUA “will not be paying any of Queelds / Mispare cost” is just making it up —-> the truth is that leno has no idea one way or the other, but wants to pretend he does.

Catching up … too busy day … 09:08, very good post, sensible & relevant.

Lenoman 09:02: “Eurasia will not be paying any of Queelds/ Mispare cost…”

… lenoman making things up again.

…. If this if this was somehow an attempt by the rest of amit’s family to salvage his ‘reputation’ by paying out money from their own pockets to bail him out, it’s pretty weird that they are going about it in such a ham-fisted, messy, sloppily communicated way … i suppose ultimately people would forgive most things if they get paid off, but why wouldn’t the family go about it all in an efficient and professional manner?

[not that i believe that family rescue story in the slightest, personally.]

(bearing in mind too that back on 20/10, amit had previously promised that “agent and distribution details will follow by week commencing 30th October”.)

… but no agent details as yet…

… rather puzzling why cloudtag has not already published who the responsible ‘agent’ (singular, not ‘agents’) is on their website, and their contact details.

that would be quick, very easy to do, barely cost owt to do, and would be useful transparent info for holders *if* there is any genuine value here. …

…and as others here have commented, it probably wouldn’t be that straightforward for the supposed ‘agent’ to find and contact the directly certificated holders, so the sooner concrete steps are taken to make it easier for agent and certificate holders to contact each other, the better, presumably?!

after all, there is surely no sensible scenario whatsoever in which the identity of the payment ‘agent’ would need to be under an NDA, no matter what other NDAs amit wants to claim apply to the Daap etc.

puzzling, eh.

Well, i think they are ‘earning’ plenty every single month, and without having to work that hard, since EUA ain’t exactly doing much. just my own opinion, and you’re entitled to your own of course. g’night.

[soz, companies, not company’s]

(i suppose a second reason to keep the plates spinning could be, if EUA goes ka-bung without there ever being a valuable asset sale and large dividend distribution, that might mean that more people would ask difficult questions about the history here when the s/p was ramped so high….

… so keeping the game in progress might stave off such inquiries for a while longer. but me, i don’t think that’s likely to be a significant factor, as i don’t believe that the EUA BoD and their associates are particularly concerned about possible repercussions after the company fails. i think they know perfectly well there are very seldom any serious consequences for AIM company’s which ‘overpromise’ but ‘underdeliver’, so to speak. jmo.)

Seamus, looks like LSE admin cut across our previous conversation, now that they have erased IKN’s misleading post made at 13:37.

you asked earlier today for suggestions why the EUA team would keep on ‘fighting’ to stay in biz, other than to keep on earning their chunky pay and perks, which you discounted as a reason.

imv, the very reason you don’t want to hear is indeed the most likely reason (and one shared with many other AIM companies run primarily to provide pay and perks for BoDs and their associates.) - i don’t know why you choose not to consider that.