RE: VOTE NO14 Aug 2021 01:21
The rules on aim need protection , it would appear that small holdings can cause havoc by depressing the value of shares to take control.
"Open your eyes" we are now at a understanding and PI have a say now thanks to social media.
The suspension of accounts here fueled the criticism and also started looking for the moles some obvious and other just pitching a slight negative ( without saying names gave that same person a full blow that was talking C@@p on another gas share ).
Even had to apologise to one on here as accused but found not guilty.
As for other companies that fell due to this act of trickery do wish we had the knowledge that we are fully aware of now.
directors of a company and that includes Non directors have a oath that they will act in best faith of the company , so we need to remove all associates remotely connect to the minority group that sanction these actions.
As a MD now for 28 years times have changed , compliance is massive in company's hence why we have Non board directors as watchers of the share holders.
To add accounts and auditors can be fined massively if they reported incorrect information on audited accounts as well as all the directors on civil courts on behalf of share holders ( Note the winners are lawyers and solicitors )
Can say that having gone to high court and taken a once top 100 company and won was not pure victory as 1/5 was in fees , the top 100 company later around 5 years collapsed in went in insolvent.
Can not name for legal purposes but not hard to work out.
So we need a PI defence team to act on our side in law , as to vote can take time to go through the phoning to say yes or no when we could just vote by using our shares held through one portal
Sign In
Follow the stocks
