Member Info for Teacup64

It wouldn't suprise me if CB forgot to inform the market 6months ago that he sold his shares in XTR :) Seeing that I clearly have more credibility than CB, this is how I think it's gonna go down from here... 1) An expanded Sino, or other large contractor will fill the M&O block alluvial void on an industrial scale, and with an increased recovery rate for fine gold. 2) A big HR contract will be awarded for development of fairbride....but with a small portion of NPV going to ourselves due to lack of funds to contribute a reasonable proportion of Capex. 3) Omnia will continue with all other Manica HR deposits at the agreed 50/50 split. 4) XTR will do a reverse Mugabe by fleeing to Zimbabwe to seek fertile gold fields elsewhere. 5) Zimbabwe will teach CB the definition of 'value'. ....Hope your listening Colin as these are your next instructions!

Referring to an earlier point about Moz, I actually mean the guys behind Moz.

If anyone wants not to wait to rid of the man, a post of mine last week has the relevant regulations from the Companies Act to pursue this resolve yourself.

I like the part in the RNS that states that we have achieved, not 3, but 2 alluvial contracts...even though he goes on to effectively say that out of the 2 successful contract mining agreements, Moz will be exiting swiftly(they can't afford mods to plant themselves). CB is supposed to be an experienced professional...everyday he appears more like Todd on Goldrush. CB told us that Moz were proffesionals in the game, yet they appear to be the exact opposite....no wonder, he didn't disclose to much about them to allow us the opportunity to research them from the start...they are diamond miners, not gold miners! CB has allowed, or colluded with Silbersten to blatantly mislead the market on net profits. CB has used this statement by Silberstein to hide the source of the $400k loan amongst cash flow....or what we later discover to be from placing generated funds. In other words, shareholders took a dilution to fund Moz, an amateur 3rd party company. CB has purposely withheld key information that shareholders(CBs employers) would otherwise require in order to make the best financial decisions(whether buying or selling). CB has until the 22nd of June to pull something out the bag. If CB fails to achieve this, I will start a movement to gather enough percentage of voters rights to call a meeting to rid of CB and Silberstein. If he does pull something out the bag, I will allow a further 6months to materialise whatever it is he does achieve, otherwise, the same route applies....I may even go on an AIM wide campaign, there's surely enough disgruntled folk.

...pipeline or pipe dream ;)

"Chapter 3, Regulation 303: Members' power to require directors to call general meeting (1)The members of a company may require the directors to call a general meeting of the company. (2)The directors are required to call a general meeting once the company has received requests to do so from— (a)members representing at least [F15%] of such of the paid-up capital of the company as carries the right of voting at general meetings of the company (excluding any paid-up capital held as treasury shares); or (b)in the case of a company not having a share capital, members who represent at least [F15%] of the total voting rights of all the members having a right to vote at general meetings. (3)F2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)A request— (a)must state the general nature of the business to be dealt with at the meeting, and (b)may include the text of a resolution that may properly be moved and is intended to be moved at the meeting. (5)A resolution may properly be moved at a meeting unless— (a)it would, if passed, be ineffective (whether by reason of inconsistency with any enactment or the company's constitution or otherwise), (b)it is defamatory of any person, or (c)it is frivolous or vexatious. (6)A request— (a)may be in hard copy form or in electronic form, and (b)must be authenticated by the person or persons making it". "Chapter 3, Regulation 304: Directors' duty to call meetings required by members (1)Directors required under section 303 to call a general meeting of the company must call a meeting— (a)within 21 days from the date on which they become subject to the requirement, and (b)to be held on a date not more than 28 days after the date of the notice convening the meeting. (2)If the requests received by the company identify a resolution intended to be moved at the meeting, the notice of the meeting must include notice of the resolution. (3)The business that may be dealt with at the meeting includes a resolution of which notice is given in accordance with this section. (4)If the resolution is to be proposed as a special resolution, the directors are treated as not having duly called the meeting if they do not give the required notice of the resolution in accordance with section 283".

For any interested parties, the Companies Act 2006 contains some useful I formation that some may wish to exercise.... "Chapter 1, Regulation 168: Resolution to remove director (1)A company may by ordinary resolution at a meeting remove a director before the expiration of his period of office, notwithstanding anything in any agreement between it and him. (2)Special notice is required of a resolution to remove a director under this section or to appoint somebody instead of a director so removed at the meeting at which he is removed. (3)A vacancy created by the removal of a director under this section, if not filled at the meeting at which he is removed, may be filled as a casual vacancy. (4)A person appointed director in place of a person removed under this section is treated, for the purpose of determining the time at which he or any other director is to retire, as if he had become director on the day on which the person in whose place he is appointed was last appointed a director. (5)This section is not to be taken— (a)as depriving a person removed under it of compensation or damages payable to him in respect of the termination of his appointment as director or of any appointment terminating with that as director, or (b)as derogating from any power to remove a director that may exist apart from this section". This section of the Companies Act is obviously relating to the removal of certain characters within the company, and in our case, due to the sheer lack of information provided by the company to its owners. If you dispute this even arising, ask yourself, after approximately 8 months, what did we ever know about production regarding Omnia, Sino and Moz? What do we know about the revenue they have generated in that time? "Chapter 2, Regulation 174: Duty to exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence. (1)A director of a company must exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence. (2)This means the care, skill and diligence that would be exercised by a reasonably diligent person with— (a)the general knowledge, skill and experience that may reasonably be expected of a person carrying out the functions carried out by the director in relation to the company, and (b)the general knowledge, skill and experience that the director has". This section relates to the $400k loan that apparently came from cash flow which didn't exist at that point in time. This section also relates to the misleading statement by Mr Silberstein regarding net profit which was not corrected until the following quarter despite the numerous calls and emails. It also applies to Mr Bird who also allowed such info to slip without correction.

This wannabe hacker must be really shit. If he/she was good they would instead hack a website which discloses member details such as users, passes, bank details etc. As the Sula website does not hold any of this info, "security", or lack of, is not really an issue as this 'Sniper' fella wants to claim. Personally I think it has nothing to do with lack of security on the website, but rather a script kiddy doing it simply because he can...in other words, he's a right cocktail!

Hi guys, 2 quick questions... 1) What happened to the following wells, there doesn't appear to be much detail of them? Platanillo Wells: 1,2,6,7,10,11,13,15,16,17,18,19 2) What oil are AMER dealing with. WTI or Brent? Thanks all.