On the basis of this churlish response - I assume that you have nothing substantive to add to the discussion?
"it was very gushy and light on fact."
It might be useful if you could use your own words - perhaps - just perhaps - provide an original critique - as opposed to using mine?
"In my view, what is a great pity is that holders funds remain tied up, the shares they applied for remain in limbo land all while the company is still unable to comply with some of the listing rules - that's something more akin to a great pity!! "Clutching straws now Basileus." (by the way it is clutching at straws).
So that is clutching at a straw? You mean it's not a pity that holders funds remain tied up in this thing? Very odd comment!
""CGB stable"? What stable? Have all of the acquisitions been completed? Did I miss something? I think there's more than a few spare stalls in this 'stable'."
You have an answer for this? I would be interested as might others - I would think.
"And whilst on that topic - the pro posters have not responded to the all too obvious questions arising out of one of my earlier posts." 37350374
And you can add to this discussion? Well ... let's see your point of view then!
And how you going with the 11th Supplementary Prospectus? Yes that's 11 - unheard of even for the next MM global behemoth.
Seriously, you are invested in a company that issues Supplementary Prospectus after Supplementary Prospectus (11 in total) and you worry about my posts? Your funds are tied up for who knows how long - the acquisitions remain incomplete - you have no re-listing date - cash bleed to related entities continues unabated - and bauxite going nowhere despite a management trip to China.
A poster (after your post) made some reference to Modus Operandi - now that was a poignant post.
A post referring to Modus Operandi on the CGB thread - absolutely hilarious. Irony in its purest form!
Modus operandi - I wonder if that poster even bothered to look it up!