Member Info for Toffee2468

BeerNSex.... You are Ben Turney? 263 post, all aimed at TEA? What gives?

jR.... Yes, deadly serious. Yes, aware that Jason Drummond has stepped down. Was I supposed to flip out about that? He's clearly not just walking away. I guess I just don't submit to the groupthink that prevails here. I do agree that the lack of communication has been annoying through the suspension, mind, notwithstanding that the catch-22 is clear.

fair lady .... You seem a little paranoid. I am a shareholder, and made the effort to go to the meeting this week. You didn't. Your prerogative. And it's mine to add my say. I want my capital back (or a chunk of it at least), so if the new proposed bod have some spectacular track record of managing investments and developing apps in the trading sector, then awesome. Otherwise, I'll rather take my chances on the original entrepreneurs. This is AIM, after all.

Hi Dazzle, I respect your right to an opinion ;) But what criminal activity are you surmising would be found? Late filing of accounts? A fine I guess. Not much more unless it's proven to be a persistent, repeated and wilful noncompliance. Sure they could muster a credible defence. Have they spunked all our money away whilst in suspension... No, I very much doubt so, as they've said in circular and in person last Tuesday that they've cut right back on costs at point of suspension. Have they erred criminally in failing to fully implement the investment policy? Think that would be a stretch to reach that judgment, seeing as there was a nomad signing off on each arns that they put out for each investment as being in line with their investment policy. Have they made potentially bad investments? Maybe - that's not a crime though, is it (least I hope not, otherwise I should be put away for being in here and in others like SBLM myself.) Should they have announced to us in October as soon as there was a risk on aim rejecting their implementation of meeting the investment policy requirements, rather than going ahead with the app rollout? Well, again I'd expect they are on a safe footing of being able to demonstrate that they were continuing to take steps which we expected to resolve the issue of interpretation with aim and their nomad right up to, beyond, and throughout suspension. They showed lever arch files on Tuesday with emails /correspondence relating to the rto options that they have been trying to explore for acceptability with their nomad over the period. (And before anyone goes getting excited, relax already, I didn't see anything privileged, and no printed material was handed over.) All that I'm saying is that I choose not to assume that everyone is corrupt until proven otherwise. I'm less than inclined to see my investment here go to the wall with little personal return. Each to their own though😉

Darren, Thanks for the response. Ok, so the proposed new bod say they'd show us the accounts...What then? That's the bit that concerns me. The existing bod had already said they will produce the accounts. I could appreciate their reason for delaying from what they've said in the circular, page 7, which they repeated in the meeting on Tuesday. If the EGM hadn't intervened on the timetable, I do think we may have been looking at the accounts by now alongside the vote on investment. (It's surely got to be a prerequisite for the accounts to be released in order for that £1m investment vote to be reasonably judged.) I'm not expecting the results to be stellar by any means ( but Jason Drummond via Winnifrith and Twitter alludes that they will be better than critics will expect). We can all figure out how the earlier investments have gone, and the app can so far only be described as a low throughput pilot. (I asked on Tuesday directly why such low numbers of deals in the time with Shard, and the response was that it was a proof of concept.) The app undeniably works though - I still rue that I didn't go in on HNR at 10p, given the way that spiked over the past months. And it has potential with the right people steering (i.e. the current BOD, in my own opinion. Just my interpretation, but it's gone awry on AIM not because of supposed incompetence or deceit as some people seem to assume, but because of the change in AIM regs for investment companies- AIM Notice 42 I think, which fits with the October 15 timeframe that the circular refers to as being the point where the fulfilment of investment policy began to be challenged.) But for the app to achieve the scale of something capable of being re-listable, I guess it needs to be packaged up as part of a wider enterprise (hence the investment proposal I think) Today's news on Jason Drummond's move, and him engaging on Twitter gives me some hope that our shareholder interests remain best served by not giving the remaining two on the bod the boot. Musing out loud, what happens if OF and NJ stay in place (ie against vote for res 1), but 1 or more of the new people are voted on to join? If so, who? BeerNSex... Are you Ben Turney??

Doh, rookie mistake in posting too long....part 2: I didn't expect to get (and nor did we get) any disclosures that weren't already in the circular, and frankly I'd have been worried if they were saying something on Tues that undercut what has already been documented in the circular. It doesn't sound like the timing of the egm called by the action group has helped the rest of us, as the threat of winding up the company from the action group puts the going concern of the business into doubt as far as I can see (if the action group are indeed set upon liquidating and losing the value of the app, which seems heavily predicated on Oliver Fattal) To alwayswinning... How ever did you guess that the fourth attendee was a woman, you genius.... ? Might it be because I said I was sat next to a lady perhaps? Muppet. You seem particularly vocal, which strikes as odd given that back in April you said that you'd disposed of most of your holding and remaining shares were neither here nor there to you.... I'll draw my own conclusion, thanks. To the silent majority, whether that's 70 or 80% of shareholders, I do hope as many will choose to vote with their own minds. For those local enough to vote in person, I happened to be in town this week and went in Tuesday to the Peterhouse office where the vote is taking place next week (only to find that this week's meeting was moved around the corner, doh) and it is just outside Liv St station, so easy to get to for those in London. Stay well everyone, and may this all work out in the long run. Toffee.

Some fascinating responses... I don't foresee myself becoming a prolific poster here by any means, but just for the sake of biting, here's my response after logging back on today in irked mood. Oh, and Naps, excuse the length of the post, but I thought I'd do this in one go, just to avoid the risk of scaling up to the heady heights of 13 posts too quickly and inadvertently gain some higher level of credibility which I can only dream of right now.. :) I posted my thoughts on the meeting in good faith yesterday morn, just for the benefit of those in the silent majority that may be considering their options. I don't much appreciate the accusation of being a stooge, by those that have clearly made up their mind. Whatever. Personally, i invested in teathers at the start of 2015, and hold a not immaterial sum, on which I was down at the point of suspension, but prepared to be patient upon. We all take our chances in aim, and I heard nothing in the meeting that caused me to doubt the BODs integrity. Do I think its been a master class in comms and transparency? No. Of course not. But I'm beginning to appreciate the catch-22 of whatever they say seems to be assumed as untrue, and they have a brand and prospects for recovery to look after, which aren't helped by the conjecture that is being spouted by some here. To anyone else interested in balance, is there ANY good reason why we should back the partucular proposed directors from the action group as being credible options to deliver a better outcome in winding up the company and realising ANY value from the app? Stuart Langelaan (whom I realise now is Stupot, interesting ....) was there at the end of the table on Tuesday, and is, according to google, a trance DJ and record producer... Which is all very admirable if that's your bag. Absolutely came across as a polite enough guy, if that's a qualification.... From what stupot has posted previously, he is a holder of 177,741 shares, so a smalltime interest. Kudos for being active, but by his own admission "how can we collate facts and work as a team, I've no experience in this and not a lot of free time but prepared to do my bit" (20 April 16) Ben Turney....? An 'aim activitist' and blogger for share prophets... First article of his that I clicked upon by chance was from Nov 15, warning off against investing in 88e at 0.49p, deriding their Icewine prospect. Haha! Alongside the fact that he's busy doing the same action with NEW at the moment to make a name for himself, I don't see any other credentials. Some very dubious suspicions cast by Guerilla Investing last Sept that there's a background of failed directorships and dealing in legal highs as a past career choice. Nice. David Kipling?? No idea who this is, but am prepared to be wowed. As for other responses.... Cloak and dagger?? What is cloak and dagger about them inviting shareholders to meet??? I didn't expect to get (and nor did we get) any disclosures that weren

Hi Milliano, I was there yesterday. We were met with Nilesh and Oliver. One person there within attendees who was part of the Teaholders group. Session lasted an hour and 45 before winding to a natural close. Like the lady in attendance, i was surprised that Jason Drummond wasn't there, but apparently he was not able to be in London yesterday. Oliver and Nilesh came in with various docs in hand showing the background of correspondence, to demonstrate the volume of work that has been put into seeking a viable way forward. I went in with an open mind (though inclined towards supporting the board if they could give reasoned explanation of how we got here, and what the response had been since suspension.) Just speaking for myself, but I left feeling optimistic that the bod have been working hard on a range of what were considered to be viable options for rto's, but ultimately it seems like the change in aim regs towards investment companies has been a major obstacle. Nonetheless, there were positive indications that, as per the circular, there are Heads of Terms with a new heavy weight investor who wants to harness the teathers brand and the app, and package this up in a form that can be relisted over time And, that whilst this would be dilutive for us obviously (no percentages were disclosed), Oliver and Nilesh believe that offers the best option to enable the business to return over the medium term. Each to their own in terms of decision making ,but I'm going to stick with them on this and vote against the proposals next week. This was always a speculative one for me (though not insubstantial), but the app pilot worked with Shard as a proof of concept, and Oliver alluded to a whitelisting contract being in the background, as well as the Canadian prospect. Also noted that Oliver and Nilesh haven't been drawing fees since suspension, and cost control has been managed by Nilesh. As today seems to be the appropriate day for it, I encourage all to vote after careful reading of the issued circular on the teathers webpage. My mind is made up by the strength of conviction in the app, and the feel that the prospects of realising value in the app is best served by having the existing team deliver on what they set out to do, with some further patience granted. I have been a silent reader on these pages since the buttons days/inception of Tea (and so am thankful to all who contribute to the knowledge and debate for the lazier of us) but always amazed at the level of vitriol that some folk generate, given that this is AIM, not for the fainthearted, and there is always the risk of questionable motives. (Ps. Sorry Milliano, i only registered on LSE yesterday afternoon, tried to pen this yesterday in direct reply to you on my mobile, only to then find out that I wouldn't be able to post messages until 8am today according to LSE's pop-up message. Doh.)