Member Info for Toffers

Wow, I can see from the left hand side that the personal abuse and insults are starting already. Until people report it, it will not be stopped and they will just carry on, that's what wrecks this forum.

It's not a lack of listening friendsps, it's the fact that when you try to raise something for debate, the rampers immediately cut if off with personal abuse and vitriol. I think it is them that you should be addressing.

Don't forget I did say they would do best to settle these court cases imo. So they have subsequently announced they have 'settled' one, are they going to settle the Queeld one? Perhaps friendsps gave a bit of a hint on that, who knows? and yes, I have sounded you out as the Nomad or someone from the Nomad's office, because you have sp in your handle, and so far, despite my posts referring to it several times, you've not actually denied it. End of.

If you take the court cases out of the equation Scuba, I suspect the Board would be a better place, as it would just be arguments over what is plain to see, nothing happening after 8 years on a sale still, and those peddling more jam tomorrow. The court cases have been the fuel that ignited the flames. It's an unknown quantity of what will happen, and it makes investors nervous. The fact that the company concealed it for so long from investors didn't help at all imo. For my own part, regardless of my own views, I try to provide information regardless of which side of the camp it relates to, so that there can be discussion/debate, but it's not happening, as everything just gets shot down, it doesn't mean I won't post things like that headed 'Reply' as I think it's information that applies to both sides that they can look at and digest for themselves. Time for a third brew!

A reply has been filed on the Queeld case. I don't have access to it to see what is contained within it. I got notification from caseboard at 4am this morning. I'm surprised CS stated that the case is due to be heard in November, as paperwork is still being filed, but I'm not going to explain.

If CS used the words settlement, then my bet is that the company have done a Part 36 settlement so as to avoid the risk of paying lots of legal fees of the other side. The public might not get to see what the terms of the offer were. It will be interesting to see what the order is that is finally made to bring about an end to the litigation.

"Making a well-judged Part 36 offer is an important tactical step. A Part 36 offer focuses the opponent's mind on settlement and, if settlement is not achieved, protects, to some extent, the offeror's position on costs." ukpraticallaw

Nite all, leave you to continue bickering amongst yourselves and no doubt ikn will continue his daily witch-hunt of me.

Did CS says settled or withdrawn? my understanding is he said settled. If it's been settled, someone will have paid something to settle it, along with legal costs, and the Judge will want to see the draft order, as the Judge has the power to override it, amend it, or do as he or she sees fit. End of.

My main gripe isn't about the company, it's been about Mac and cohorts, and what I see as possible market manipulation, which then begs the question, is that a fraud upon investors? I have said this previously. The company haven't helped themselves by being somewhat vague with information and that also gripes me, particularly why did they not inform shareholders of the Queeld/Mispare litigation, but that's a matter for elsewhere. There are plenty who have posted on here that the company is a fraud and so on, I have screenshots of those, as I do of the abuse that I have been subjected to, but then again, it then throws in to question the policing of these social media websites, and in particular twitter or X as it's now renamed, as you can take your own post down with immediate effect on twitter, but it still somehow remains on search engines, so I think twitter have a lot to answer for in that respect. There are times when we all get hot under the collar, you included, and you have taken abuse and I've stated it's out of order, and 9 times out of 10 I recommend your posts, I have no axe to grind with you, so am rather surprised you are now taking one to me, but there we have it. Anyhow, this conversation is counter productive, everyone is hot under the collar right now because no one knows what the outcome of the Queeld case will be and whether it will affect their investment. The sooner it's sorted the better, but there could be an appeal after the trial if the losing party is advised to pursue one, and that drags it on further, which then just increases tensions amongst shareholders. Perhaps there should be a truce on this Board and everyone stop hurling insults and calling people names, and getting hot under the collar with the Board. In reality, there's nothing new to discuss, so it's just a case of waiting until Queeld/Mispare is determined or resolved, and perhaps to find out how the Logik case has been settled, as that should appear on the caseboard site at some point soon no doubt. My views.

If the company want to speak with me, I'm sure they have my email address as I have been in touch with Keith before. As I have said several times, I invite them to make contact, and we can discuss any issues they have privately, and if it comes to light that I havespoken out of turn anywhere, and I feel it right to apologise, then I will do so, on whatever platform that it was said, but I will require some clear answers from the company first, rather than plain silence or fudging.

Lucadua, the company have the queeld case to deal with, they are in court with that, they've also had proceedings taken against them by Logik, a case they've clearly been told in the strongest terms to settle, so they've already got two court cases against them. There have been a number of shenanigans since 2019, including the walk out of the previous Nomad, Churakov's mess, which didn't help the sp, and the Board come out after the event to say they didn't know about it? no asset sales since first mentioning in March 2015 yet the constant hiding behind NDAs for 8 years and counting, the engaging of UBS and lawyers, yet nothing has happened on an asset sale at all, as spikey said, they can't even sell the concentrate they're paying to store, no 'massive' dividend forthcoming as mentioned by the Nomad, the placing for the Rosgeo monies and the still rather mysterious surroundings relating to that, and the fact the JV wasn't going to be pursued in the end wasn't actually rns'd. Neither of the court cases have been rns'd and no mention made until another shareholder found the details of the Queeld one. A few of us saw the Logik one when that appeared on caseboard subsequently. Shareholders have a right to be informed by the Board about important matters affecting their investment so they can make decisions following on from that, but this Board seem to think it's better to be economical with providing information and their shareholder comms are poor. They've added no value to the company and yet they still sit there and take their huge salaries whilst the shareholders see a huge depletion in the share price. My views and in view of what I've lost, I feel I have every right to be both questioning of this Board and aggreived by them. My views.

Furthermore, for all those who have been abusive, a Judge can order disclosure of your personal details from this company, so that would be interesting wouldn't it? So just be careful what you wish for.

To be honest, boot on the other foot, if I were the company, I would want to be shot of the whingeing and moaning British retail investors, and the quickest way to do that is to invoke a mechanism for de-listing. As I say, the Queeld case to my mind, will be the turning point one way or another. The only question is, if Queeld lose, will they have grounds for appeal, and if Eurasia lose, will they have grounds for appeal? so the matter might not end in November, and even after the judgment has been given, which usually takes around 4 weeks imo.

Err, where's the leak? if you recall, your mates ikn and friends were the first to call me out by name, so I think the saying of egg on face comes to mind. In fact, ikn repeatedly calls out names, so let's have us all in court, if you want to assert I've leaked names. Secondly, I've met Mac, there's no leak there, he knows who I am, and I know who he is, and I will be more than happy to tell a court what I know about his shenanigans. I would suggest the company stay well out of it, otherwise they are going to get dragged in to it! Thirdly, GFD called out GMF78, not I, but then it was there for all to see in any event. So be careful what you say, as ikn has been calling out names, slating, stalking, and abusing me on here for quite some time, so if I get dragged in to anything, he , Mac, and the rest of you do too. As for the company, they would be better to concentrate on the Queeld case, I think they've got enough on their plate with that, don't you? But if they want a Judge to order disclosure of their financial affairs and the NDA's etc, then so be it, as it will have to come out in to the open through litigation. My views.

Even if they get an injunction in relation to sale proceeds, that wouldn't stop the sale. I doubt they would get an injunction to prevent any such sale.

I'm not saying the Q&M case will obstruct a sale, it can't, I know that full well, unless Q&M get an injunction in relation to the sale proceeds, that wasn't what I was talking about. It was the intimation that shareholders have no say in the sale of company assets.

Talk about leading people up the garden path! Dear Lord! The directors make the day to day decisions. Shareholders still have to be consulted about major decisions involving the company, which includes asset sales, mergers and acquisitions. End of.

You say from the transcript, but now you have provided a different wording. And the same applies. Time for a brew.

Just put in your web browser, do shareholders own the company? each time you will get a YES! You stated;

"The Queeld court case has no effect on the sale of these assets as they are held by the company not the shareholder."

The assets form a part of the company, which shareholders have a beneficial interest in by way of their shareholdings. The Board cannot simply sell assets without putting it to a vote to shareholders. So who stated the above, Fonquernie or CS? I note you didn't say. Really is time for a brew. Ciao.

The subs in Cyprus, own the nickel that was palmed off, Eurasia Mining still own the remaining assets as far as I'm aware, but if the position has changed, and more of the company has been hived off in to subs, which I don't recall having being rns'd, then what the heck is anyone still investing in Eurasia Mining for, as subs are a separate legal entity? Cyprus is out of the jurisdiction of the English Courts, and basically untouchable as is money hived off in to offshore accounts in Cyprus.

This is what you stated; "The Queeld court case has no effect on the sale of these assets as they are held by the company not the shareholder."

Now you are saying the same as me, it has to go to a vote of shareholders who have to have a say, because they are a part of the company. You lot really do like twisting things for sure. As for Queeld, if you're referring to the court case, that has yet to be decided and neither you, nor anyone here, nor the company even, know what the result of that will be. That is for the Judge to decide on hearing evidence and nothing less.