Member Info for Spikeyj

dougall66, 14th july
"I have never been in the Madoffseque camp"

dougall66, 21st june
"And this from someone who is FCA registered. He couldn’t get closer to the Madoffesque theme if he tried.
9.4m in 2 1/2 years for lies. He should be sharing a cell with Bernie."

dougall66, 12th june
"I wouldn’t trust anything this FCA registered individual says unless it is backed with with strong and credible evidence.
And to think I coined the word “Maddoffesque”. Nowt like biting you in the bum with that one."

dougall66, 7th june
"This is probably my last post on the CTAG BB"

whetstone update, may 29th:

"We are aware as well that shareholders have asked for more frequent information so will publish a quarterly update moving forward. "

... sounds good. the end of august would be a full quarter on from may 29th, so
maybe they'll be explaining about britdaq dumping them in that august update?

"... we do hope our shareholders as they see our plans unfold, will be encouraged to stay for the long term. "

and now that they have been removed from britdaq, even more
shareholders have now become even loo-oonger term holders.

" .... it may well be we will need to raise funds to make investments ..."

stand by your mobile phones, whatsapp folks; incoming invites just for you!

"... In due course we shall announce a date for a General meeting ..."

it is almost tempting to buy one whet share in order to attend.
i wonder what kind of snacks they will provide? - looks like they
have a small but perfectly hygienic branch of itsu very close by.

worth remembering, it's not illegal for one entity to 'interfere' with
another entity's business just by running a campaign concentrating
on shortcomings of the opposition's business. that could simply be
legitimate competition in a tough capitalist world. if, say, aldi want to
run a campaign that repeatedly highlights how expensive waitrose is,
& how full of snotty posh people, & how much excessive packaging
waitrose use for their fruit & veg in order to put shoppers off waitrose
& encourage them to shop at aldi instead, then there's nowt wrong
with that. --> in order for such a campaign to be 'tortious', aldi
would have to be using illegal methods as part of their campaign
(e.g. deliberating poisoning waitrose products then highlighting
cases of food poisoning in waitrose cafes, or publishing fake &
libellous material about fictitious sex offender backgrounds of
various waitrose employees.) ... just because some folk went
around saying how completely **** WRN & many of the team
associated with it were doesn't mean they were acting illegally.

meanwhile, it seems odd that the BoD of whetstone still haven't
made any statement about them being struck off britdaq. their
details have now been removed completely from britdaq site.
seems very discourteous of the company not to offer at least
some explanation, particularly when they said in their last
update that they were going to try to inform s/holders more.

squiddo: "If AE's version of events are true..."

ay, there's the rub,
as the bard said.

no prob.

good luck here.

india's gonna make some people a shedload
of money in the 21st century, but tricky to
sort the hopefuls from the ones that will win.

thanks for the reply jambon -

- are you able to share the link
that shows what online resource
backs up the figure you gave? ta.

jambon: 'Average Indian spends over $300 not bloody 50!!'

? what is your source for that $300 figure please jambon?

i just did.

addicknt, just as it is a complete mystery to me why anyone
might think a cyclist would be an 'ideal co-conspirator'. atb.

i might be remembering wrong, but i seem to recall that one
of the deals which was supposedly floating around concerned
a company called something like 'the essential unicylist', or
some such? - so that might be a possible cycling connection
(although not necessarily anything at all to do with bruyneel).

addicknt, yes, he doesn't make it clear, does he?

although going on some of aiden's previous blogging,
it seems possible that the 'we' is meant to refer to the
various individuals who were named as being supposedly
injured parties in that weird tortious interference report
which aiden earley posted on his blog, and which is still
sitting there. i don't think that the report states who has
authored it, & i don't think aiden explained that either, so
it's hard to know how well sourced, truthful or accurate it is.

the tortious inference report posted up by aiden names several individuals such
as johan bruyneel as being "principal injured parties'' in the WRN saga. ( - i don't
know whether that report is correct in asserting that bruyneel has been involved
with WRN, or even whether he is aware that report & aiden's blog mention him.)

the tortious interference report states about johan bruyneel that:

"JOHAN BRUYNEEL (“JB”) is a substantial investor in Worthington and also former manager of Lance Armstrong the cyclist who admitted to doping. JB became an investor in Worthington as a result of a recommendation by Alan Biggar. The Interferents have tried to allege that he is an ideal co-conspirator in the alleged Worthington fraud. Introduced by Allan Biggar he has invested more than £400,000 in the company pre-and post- suspension and has never sold any shares."

given the stated historic connection to lance armstrong,
it would seem reasonable imo to presume that's the same
johan bruyneel who is discussed in this article from late '18:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/bruyneel-banned-for-life-by-cas-says-we-were-children-of-our-era/

manifesto, it will only 'run and run' if
they ever actually start doing anything.

imv, it is hard to give much credence to
anything he says about legal action,
given how remarkably poor the fit is
between what aiden says about this,
versus what then seems to happen.

for example, it's now been one *year* since aiden announced:

"I will notify readers as soon as Mr Stevenson has been served with the Summons."

.... sure, if a summons was served, then a person who that is served
on might deploy delaying tactics. - but aiden has not announced
that that writ has been served in the first place, one full year on.

if i was someone thinking of doing a deal with aiden (for
the avoidance of doubt, i am not, lol) i would not just be
looking to see if other people had nasty things to say about
him on the internet -- i would also be looking to see what aiden's
track record is of (a) successful business deals that genuinely result
in companies thriving and shareholders making money, & (b) what is
the track record of aiden actually doing what he says he will do?

as ever, squid, you misread and make incorrect assumptions.

if i thought that you genuinely wanted to enter into some
discussion about wrn/whet with an open mind, i would be
more than happy to chat with you about your ideas and
questions. but i've seen enough of you over the last few
years to know otherwise - from my perspective, you are
just a troll, & in general it's not interesting to engage trolls.

if however someone posts factually misleading information
on a share board, such as an assertion that there was no
dumping of millions of whet shares when they started
trading, then i will sometimes comment to correct such.

squid, your 22:41 was to davieh, not me.
entirely up to him if he wants to answer you.

i just wanted to remind others reading this board
that yes, it is a matter of factual public record in the
confirmation statement, available through companies
house, who was buying & who was selling whet shares
at what prices, and that does indeed show that *millions*
of shares were dumped, just as davieh said to begin with.

imv, disingenuous at best to suggest otherwise as at 22:41.

two particular individuals were prominent large sellers.

squiddo: "Davie, I'm not sure millions of shares were dumped? Do you have the exact figure or was that just a guess?"

squid, factual and detailed information about who has been holding
whetstone shares, & who was then dumping them in what amounts,
is detailed in the filings made by the company itself at companies house.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/10905791/filing-history

specifically, the confirmation statement of august '18
refers to a 'bulk list' which you can obtain by phoning
companies house (as per final page of the confirmation
statement) to ask for a cd-rom. ... that list clearly shows
that two particular individuals were sustained & heavy
sellers of whetstone from the word go, long before
most ordinary pis would even have received shares.

presumably another confirmation statement is due in august '19.
if that also contains similarly detailed information about who has
been trading the shares, it will show whether either of those two
individuals was again a seller when the NARC ramp was underway.

a fourth and fifth thing also come to mind:

"a fool and his money are soon parted", and

"you can fool some of the people all the time".

curious the way that article refers to WRN
as 'Earley's Worthington Group'. .. after
all, aiden wasn't a WRN director, was he?

so what is that newspaper thinking his role was?

helpful thrives under pressure.

lol, sure.

the worse this company and the
share price does, the more helpful
posts about just how attractive the
longer term prospects are. - & yet,
& yet, the share price still languishes.

always jam just round the corner.

it's been a couple of years, approx, since
i made some sceptical remarks on this
board. helpful sneered then that he knows
a lot more than me about the company.

sure, it may v. well be that he 'knows' more.

but still, the share price is a whole lot lower.

he has been very consistently long but wrong.

puzzling why he & orslega have ramped so consistently.

(.... unless of course, helpful has been trading in a
& out, making use of his excellent connections with
the company, rather than just holding long & strong?
but that would be rather contrary to the way he posts)

at rough guess, something about -

conspiracies, dark forces, brexit,
tramps who froth at the mouth,
god, GOD, GAAAAAAAWWRDD,
scottish hackers, tortoises, FCA,
miracles, brexit (again), his book, &
perhaps, cough, some forward-looking
comments about share prices & deals?

- but probably not a lot about tom winnifrith
and share puppets, nor his gofundme campaign
against TW. -- after all, aiden's gofundme campaign
has been closed now .... i don't know what became
of the money aiden had raised (not a huge amount)??

.... aidan had announced that no money would
be drawn except in relation to legal expenses for
which the receipts would first be published on
his blog. -- but strangely, so far as i saw, no such
receipts were published? - but then again, there
was no announcement about the gofundme cash
being given back to the donors. - so perhaps in
the blog tomorrow aiden will explain if he gave
that gofundmemoney back to the donors? - or
alternatively he will publish the receipts that
show how it was spent, as per the terms on
which it was raised in the first place? maybe, lol.

same old carter.

good to see some
things don't change.

atb.