Member Info for Ssccss

NU, maybe the person who issued it, doesn't believe it's unfounded. However, if it is unfounded then what is the issue? I'm sorry but it feels like lots of excuses as to why ppp haven't applied for suspension but no hard facts. IMO no one can stop ppp coming back apart from ppp. Please explain to me the exact mechanism by which this could happen? Because otherwise it's just another narrative. Ppp really need to communicate clearly on this.

Yes but NU my point is... I do not see how it is possible for anyone outside of ppp, to prevent ppp from coming back? If everything is above board now and accounts are done? Then any investigations/court cases will be concluded swiftly and it would be a total waste of money. Surely, it is really down to ppp when ppp come back.

NU, how can ppp be prevented from coming back by outside forces? It doesn't make sense to me. If everything is as it should be now with ppp then what can prevent a return to trading? Why are ppp not being transparent about the remaining steps. ASI seems to think from a regulatory perspective they just need to apply to relist now accounts are done. This is why I don't have faith in the ppp bod because we are not getting the answers shareholders need.

This saga gets more bizarre by the day. Hope for some clarification soon.

So what's this comment NU?

"

I think we could see alot more details than you have posted to date......but then you already now that don't you?"

NU, how do you know so much if you weren't at the agm?

So ASI, are you saying the suspension is still only due to the accounts? And now those are done, ppp just need to apply? I don't understand why we need Sparks then? It's all as clear as mud.

It's pretty obvious the deletion was because of the vulgar comments by the Jules poster

ASI, how do you know that? I really wish the company would clarify what the remaining obstacles are that are preventing relisting.

As mentioned RMD haven't crossed the 30% threshold alone. So as long as there is no related party aspect, then the investigation should be swift and we should be back trading ASAP.

It's coming up to 2 years...

NU, you are like a bot. Pointless. I just want this to return to trading, as we all do. The company needs to communicate clearly in writing what is preventing that from happening. This is not acceptable at all. Asking shareholders to vote without that information was ridiculous but now the vote is done, they should jsut be honest and tell shareholders what is going on. If that's not what you want NU, then either you are not a shareholder or you are being disingenuous.

Poor Zag is getting his hopes up about an imminent return to trading RNS.

I'm sorry, but that just takes the mick, adding insult to injury. If this is true about a new investigation regarding Lse and UK takeover panel then why has this not been communicated to all shareholders??? The transparency is a joke.

Dsaf, do you think this will be in a future rns?

You are expecting an RNS tonight or tomorrow announcing return to trading? That would be lovely.

On the last call, it was mentioned they are still trying to get approval/signatures from all the 'heirs' to the well. So I don't think operations are imminent.

Mr twisted, that makes little sense for retail investors.

Are you serious? Short sellers don't hold shares so can't vote...

Seems short sighted to be dismissive of 17m votes.