RE: Litigation Impact14 Jun 2023 12:23
OSF, it's not as simple as that. One is that we never get to see a full breakdown of the accounts, so where are the fees/costs that have been paid to these so called experts, and for legal fees? we never see it as such. So much is hidden in my view. Secondly, was it not stated that the monies would be used mainly for the Rosgeo JV buy out of the remaining mines? If so, then I can think you can guess what I would say about that. You can't raise the bulk of it for one thing and inform shareholders that is what it is for, and then utilise it for another means because essentially, the Board have got themselves in to trouble, and thus carried the shareholders in to the quagmire with them. With two sets of high court litigation, we have no idea what our own lawyers alone are charging, and it won't be cheap that's for sure! I doubt it will be shown on the accounts either. Then if they should lose the Queeld case say, heaven knows what the damages might be, but as Queeld alone had over 300 mill shares, and if a judge takes a median between 0-43p say and decides for example that on average, they might have sold half, at half of the sp, so say 21p, we're talking about millions, and then there is Mispare as well with their 80 mill + from recollection, plus there's the time to factor in that has passed when they haven't been able to sell, so that adds on more, plus their legal fees, we are talking many millions! This is why I feel they need to come out and be brutally honest and give shareholders both sides of the coin, not just the oh there's nothing to worry about gaff, because there is, a Judge will hear all the evidence and it's 50/50, know one knows what his judgment will be until he has read the pleadings and heard the evidence. What erks me even more is the fact that they were doing placings, knowing full well the court proceedings were about to commence, and I suspect knew all along they were going to need some dosh! So was it in effect ever really for the Rosgeo buy out? Who knows. But it certainly smells fishy. Plus the Nomad sits there pronouncing a massive divi likely, when he already knew that the Queeld dispute was in situ, and likely to go to court, and he doesn't even get the Board to communicate it, which to my mind, IS a material event, which affects all shareholders and shareholders should be allowed to re-consider their investment strategies based upon that information. Instead, we saw a further decline in the sp anyway, because I suspect Mr Market Maker knew, and we didn't. The auditors should have picked it up before the Annual Report was produced in 2022 and should have made the Board report it, but no, didn't happen, and that is why I want answers, if not for myself and my own inquisitiveness, and because I've nursed a huge loss through their incompetence, but for the sake of the rest of you, because you deserve answers, so no, I'm not here to be disruptive, I'm here to seek and find some answers. My views.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
