Member Info for timbo237

Well if you've got the evidence that I referenced AIM Rule 17 just screenshot it on here. That will settle it and I will admit I'm wrong and apologise.

Oh and for the record I want Lunn out because he doesn't follow the rules and only has his own interests at heart not those of shareholders.

Yes I am. I don't even know what Rule 17 is and why would I quote it when unlike you I know PPP is not traded on AIM. Show me evidence that I said this.

ASI - "Timbo, you're very good at this, but it was you in a now-deleted post who mentioned AIM Rule 17. I simply quoted what AIM Rule 17 states. I pointed out that it depends on what the articles of association specify, to which you responded that Article 17 takes precedence."

Not me I'm afraid. Don’t even know what AIM Rule 17 is. Think you are beginning to lose the plot here.

ASI - you seem to be under a misapprehension that PPP were trading on AIM

"Under AIM Rule 17, companies are expected to notify the market “without delay” of any changes to directors or company officers, including the appointment of a new company secretary. So unless there’s an RNS I’ve missed, this looks like a clear omission."

"but the actual drafting and submission would likely involve the company secretary and oversight from the Nomad (Strand Hanson)."

Just for clarity PPP were trading on the main market and therefore don't require a Nomad.

ASI "No, it’s not contrary—if you actually read the Articles of Association and the Companies Act 2006"

You obviously haven't read them then because you're wrong as usual.

So if Lunn is following the Articles and obeying the Companies Act how come he has never RNS'd the appointment of a new company secretary?

No

Zag - that is contrary to the company’s Articles of Association. So yet again Lunn just rides roughshod over rules and regulations and you're just happy to accept it.

No Hepran. All we ask is that Lunn runs the company for the benefit of the shareholders not just himself and his mates. Also the constant breaches of the Companies Act, conflicts of interest and downright lies we have endured from him over the last year cannot continue and the first glimpse of the new CEO suggests it will.

Bear in mind also that the company’s Articles of Association require any directors appointed to be voted on at the next AGM after their appointment so why aren't Mavriky Kalugin and Richard Spinks up for re-election on Friday?

Zag - that's very true. That's why in my opinion it's vital to get Lunn out.

Good job you don't try and attend as you'll be refused entry. Only open to shareholders.

Why should it be shared with halfwits like you and ASI? You both contribute nothing constructive at all

Post a screenshot of your shareholding. Can't you read?

"You post all day, every day on this board"

Says somebody who's posted 69 times in 2 days. Think you need help.

Notice you haven't taken up the challenge. You certainly won't be at the AGM.

Do you really expect us to believe that you suddenly start posting on here 15 months after the share has been suspended and that you are a shareholder? Where have you been - under a rock?

More likely this is just one of your many aliases on this board.

I actually have 314,000 shares and am willing to post a screenshot to prove it if you prove what your hold8ng is. So over to you. Clown

Sorry. It's only open to shareholders.

Well Lunn seems to think that 50% of them is worth at least $4.7m. You'd better tell him that he's wrong. Like almost everything else he does.

Hepran - still waiting to hear if you've told Lunn he's spent $4.7m on nothing.

ASI - reported