Member Info for ynotdeal

Andy, youre picking at bones. But you know what I mean. I see the humour in your comment. Goodnight.

Hi. Our activities were always going to result in one of two things, 1.. we win new terms and an acceptable offer. We did not achieve that, we have admitted that, but there is no shame in that. BHs believed they had a stronger hand and stood fast. It is not Alan Linn that would have changed terms, he has no power over the offer. Its all down to the BHs. That is a fundamental misunderstanding by people on here that say "Alan hasnt given you anything". Was never his to give im afraid. 2.. we block the BHs from taking 90% of our company. As we stand now after the shelving of the EGM and the vote, we still have our shares and plan a and plan b apear to have floundered. Wr now look for a plan c. Is there something else we could have done. I would say that was an achievement, you may disagree and I respect that.

Yellow, I must have missed that question, but it has been discussed and analysed many times on here. Im afraid an answer will have to wait till after the weekend. Post it again on tuesday and I will try and answer you.

Hi, you seem to express a genuine concern about what ASOG have achieved and why we support Alan Linn. I will answer that but I cannot do that now, I need my other computers to track back a number of issues and at the moment I am away. However, our achievements are not a sesies of distinctive battles won (or lost as some would say) but a series of moving forward to a point where we now find ourselves still owning 100% of Afren, not being in plan a or b, most penal clauses do not exist anymore as there was no vote, the BHs are in disarray and the company is still solvent (that is not down to us but AL). All that would have been done and dusted on 25th June at the AGM and we would have had the company wrenched from us. Some will say but look what trouble we are now in. We were always going to be at this point if we were successful. The alternative was simply to give your shares away. We now await other oportunities to arise, from whatever source. So somewhere along the line we must have had some successes. We havent been totally ineffectual. Some would say it would have happened anyway. But I dont recall anyone else standing up and doindg something about it.

But Yellowcraig asks a genuine question and deserves a genuine answer which I tried to do.

LOL singy, in your 4 line post you succinctly expressed my 500 word statement. I speak too much lol.

Hi yellowcraig, No we have not disbanded. We will be thin on the ground over the nexy few days. Two of us are away with our families, but we will be monitoring the situation and we can be contacted if something happens. ASOG is a reactive group. In other words we respond to what happens with the BHs and the BOD. We have always done that. It is how we got to the point of building a large block of like minded shareholders and mobilising the NO vote. Making sure everyone as far as possible knew how to vote and that the BHs and BOD knew and believed the power of our position. That is why we are not now in plan a or plan b. Because we (ASOG members) reacted and opposed. We did what we are here to do. As a group we are not in a position put forward new proposals as we do not have access to funds to put down. (We do put forward ideas but that requires other peoples money). We assess proposals laid down by other parties, convey our findings to our membership and when we know their views we express those forcefully to the other parties involved as to whether our members support or reject that proposal. We are therfore a group that uses its power to exert pressure to influence change. We speak as one person based on our members views. The position we are now in is that the company is in information lockdown. Reading between the lines my guess is that means there are discussions being conducted behind closed door. We are still convinced the BHs want to salvage their debt, and the BOD want the company to survive as a going concern. With that comes our own salvation, or the vote is still NO. Please remember the BHs and the BOD are not synonimous. The EGM is postponed indefinitely, Plan a and Plan b appear to have dissolved and may morph into something else. There may be other parties circling. There may be plans by the BOD to sell assets to pay down debt. We do not know. So from that point of view there is little happening that we are aware of, and because we are reactive we cannot do anything until we hear what is the next proposal of the BHs or any other party. However, we are trying to set up further meetings with the company, in spite of the radio silence. Until there is a new proposal on the table, if ever there is one, or varied terms, we cannot assess them and report to members. So our plan had not changed. It remainsvto :- Assess any live proposal. Put our findongs and opinion to members. Establish their view. Put that view to the other parties. If we are in opposition, formulate a plan as to how we quash that proposal. So at the moment its wait and see. Thats not negative. It means we are ready, with all our resources, to catch the ball when its kicked. If you have any other suggestions of what else we should do please let us know. It will be seriously taken on board. Best wishes Tony

Hi andy, Thank you for our comments. You are wrong about ALAG. They started off As a "get the ba$$ards", put them all in jail group. They were only inderested in pursuing past wrong doings.They attacked everyone remotely associated with Afren, even those who were not there at the time and then us. There accusations amounted to for example "the shares have been shorted therfore the bondholders must be guilty of insider dealing... sue them" What a basis for a case!! Now that the ALAG legal drive is falling away because they have not managed to get funding, they have recently changet their message to "we want a fairer dea". Great, thank you ALAG. Thats what we spent 4 months fighting. If it was not for ASOS there will have been no resistence, the yes vote would have been won at the AGM and the BHs would now have 90% of your money. The game plan is changed unrecognisably. That is down to ASOG members standing their ground. We dont know the outcome yet. It may still be zero value. But thats what we fought for. Confidentiallity seems to be an issue. And we understand that. But more is made of it than is actually there. All our meetings were conducted under an agreement for confidentiallity. Some issues we discussed off the record. As you know, off the record comments tend to be more "fuzzy", not cast in stone and more like opinion. We were asked not to disclose such comments. The reason being that anything published is there for ever and open to misinterpretation and quoting out of context, leaving no room for views to change or new plans. Im sure you understand. If we did not agree to that stance, Alan would simply not have made any off the record comments. Although not substantive in any way, those comments enabled us to get a better understanding of the broader picture. In fact I cannot think of any issues that were that whould have been significant to shareholders. People seem to think we are in possession of great state secrets. That is simply not the case. The argument for tact an diplomacy is that it opens the door for more frank and open discussion. You will see that since ALAGs more aggressive pursuit of the BOD and others, and Wild wolf's ranting reports, there has been an information lockdown by the company. They are talking to no one now. That is how the ALAG team are destroying efforts to oftain a better deal. We are currently trying to re-open channels of communication with the company but theu are not responding to us at the moment. Tank you ALAG. However, we are persistent and we willl get there. I have it on record that Ldlv is now saying "we are transparent with our members, except when we are advised not to be". Sounds suspiciously like confidentiallity to me! I hope this goes some way toward clarifying issues.

Our firest meeting with Alan Linn was a scoping meeting to talk face to face for the first time. Our second meeting was to express our members viewpoint and press Alan on his the plans for after the vote. A few days later we published an A4 document reporting that meeting. Anything that was not reported was discussed off the record an in any event was not of real significant. Alan did not want off the record comments published online, or he would not have made them. Again you will have to find that report yourself. After our meeting with Blackstones and Morgan Stanley, we issued a short statement that we were awaiting the publication of the prospectus. We did not discus any issues that were not around the prospectus, or plan a and plan b and we did not comprehensively discuss the content of the prospectus as that would have breached the BH confidentialty undertakings. All of that is in the public domain. We have never said we object to legal action where there are proven issues. Please show me that statement. We said that we believed that now was not the time and place for it and there would be a place for that in the future. We do object to the belligerent attitude of the ALAG and the continuous unsubstantiated accusation of individuals. We respect their objectives but are not associated with them. As far as taking legal action against individuals who have grossly overstepped the mark, you should expect that consequence. Have a good day and do your homework in future. Tony

Good morning bounty. you have asked a number of questions. Firstly regarding TW. Please let me know where you have obtained the information that TW is "official spokesperson for ASOG". I dont recall that statement. We do see lambasting and criticism of our work on here and and we take that on board. However the content of your posting yesterday was offensive and abusive in the extreme and deserves civil action to redress and police investigation. There are now laws that protect people from online abuse such as yours. And every word published is permanently recorded in archive. We were highlighted individually and as such we may all take action againt you and others, individually or jointly with PeteB. That is our choice. We have undertaken with our members that we will not disclose any information they send us to any other party. ALAG do post the content of messages but their source is unattributed and therefore valueless. They may be penned by ALAG team themselves. Only wild wolfs are attributed, but of course we know he refuses to identify himself even confidentially to ALAG of ASOG. So no credibility there then. He is now destroying the ALAG teams work by the issuing his fanatical unsubsubstantiated accusations of anything that moves while offering no evidence himself. All pure fantasy and the wider shareholders are seing him for what he is, which actuslly increases our support. So thank you WW. No we dont post our members confidential comments. Unlike ALAG we have a serious regard for trust, and confidentiality is a part of that. Three achievements of ASOG? That has already been published and is in the public domain. I am not going to go back and find that report for you. You have to do your own work. If you have been paying attention over the months you will have seen that report. It was posted several times and listed about 9 achievements from memory. You misrepresent the truth about reporting our meetings. We never said that we would categorically report the content. Show me where we said that. In fact we stated that out meetings were confidential but we would report back were we were able.

I dont believe any of the ASOG cttee have ever been abusive. And as for being a yes voter, im sure we have said to you before that we respect that view and encourage shareholders to vote in whatever way the believe to be correct. We may disagree with your views but we absolutely respect your right to choose and for standing up to your convictions

So long as what you post is provably true, youre probably ok, thats my understanding

No you are wrong isengard. Abuse is never ok, slander is never ok, defamation is never ok. Thats the law not me talking. Yes bulletin boards are informal, express different views, but persecute someone and someone will come gunning for you, and they will win because the record is here.

Hi isengard. You miss the point. Of course you can filter people if you dont like their comments. But that doesnt stop other people from reading them and it fuels more. If you are being attacked, slandered and defamed, you dont need to see that, but it still does you reputational damage with such comments in the public domain and some will want to challenge that. Many people have been prosecuted from facebook and paricularly twitter, and found guilty. People dont seem to realise that when you post something online there is a visible, trackable trail that leads right to your front door. If you are one of these abusive posters (and I dont mean you because you are not), one day, some time someone will be knocking on your door.

Hi isengard. 88% shareholders at the AGM voted to re-elect Alan Linn. Admittedly much of that comprised a few block votes, but any shareholder that opposed Alan Linn had the opportunity to vote against him and they didnt feel strongly enough to do that.. On that basis most shareholders support him. Yes on LSE some posters (not all are shareholders) are anti Linn. But I would be surprised if there are more that 25 regular posters on here so the anti camp is pretty small by any standard. We have just under 650 members of ASOG and I do see comments opposing Alan in our emails, mostly from the same posters we see on here. I dont see the same sentiment coming from the large remaining block of mdmbers. So based on information and not conjectire, I think most PIs support Alan Linn, as I know you do too.

Hi GG. nice to see you here. It amuses me to read your "words". But as usual, no engagement, youre ignored. Youre not worth the time of day.

Hi Bthus, You misunderstand the severity of many of the accusations and threats on here, or you havent seen them. Ever since I have been involved on here, from before march, there has been a stream of unfounded allegation, defamation, abuse, villification and personal threats of violence directed at the BOD past and present. Under that pressure would you, if you were a victim of that, not also have been seeking serious advice from your lawyers. My personal understanding is that the company also had to seek the services of a security agency for advice on the personal security of certain individuals. We were able to persuade the company not to pursue a tough legal line with those belligerent individuals and we explained that many shareholders were under deep emotional distress with large personal losses and that accounted for the unreasonable behavoiur online. To date I am not aware of any actions that have been taken against individuals, so we must have been successful in that. However, I feel certain my own mind that every comment of a disparaging nature, posted on here has been recorded, and a file on every such perpetrator sits in a lawyers office somewhere, ready. Thats what lawyers do. Build evidence. So yes, I think the directors of the campany have wasted a lot of time, and shareholders money, setting up defenses against these allegations. And that has been at the cost of spending time seeking alternative solutions. But then thats just my view. A realistic one I suggest. Tony

Bounty, I believe your post of 16:13 may have gotten you into hot water. In my opinion you have fallen into the Afren Legal Group, and associate's, trap to get postings online that purport to be the words of the poster and not theirs. Would you say that coming directly from you that makes the libel and defamation accusations you utter seem so much more believable? Do you think that has transferred the legal responsibility for those words on to your shoulders? The words appear under your post name, you have not attributed them to another source and you have not disclaimed them from being your words. They will have been read by many observers of LSE as your own words, which of course your post makes them to be. They may have unjustly damaged certain individuals reputations. I wish you luck. I would not want to be in your position in a public arena.

Hi bounty, im not sure I understand this post of yours. In just a few sentences, when do you think the problems of Afren started, and what has been tbe cause of the whole debacle from 148p down to 1.7p.

Ah GG IS BACK. But heis still ignored. Dorry mste, you are not worth the time of day.