Afc Energy Share Discussion Threads

[beeezzz] 18/12/2014 15:25

Good!!!!!!!! thanks for clarifying that........

[25october1969] 18/12/2014 12:33

No There is an RNS showing the 13% owned by RA's investment vehicle. I have not seen an RNS showing any shares owned by Shvidler, directly or though his investment vehicle?

[beeezzz] 18/12/2014 11:59

I think you mean RA investment vehicle....

[25october1969] 18/12/2014 07:19

Since I know so little about the ways of the stock market, help me out and show me the RNS stating that Shvidler or his investment vehicles owns 13% of VLS

[beeezzz] 17/12/2014 17:37

25oct...You believe whatever you like....but as far as I am concerned he has influence over 26% of the company, whether in fact is immaterial...start to understand the stock market it may help you.

I agree RA holding is 13% as he states, his team mate also holds 13% through his investment vehicle.

[25october1969] 17/12/2014 16:57

if it was matched it would have been announced - my issue is with distortion of the facts, how they are interpreted is a totally separate matter

[norbus] 17/12/2014 12:39

25October 1969

a 45 years old behaving like a child thumbing his nose ; has it occured that Roman investments through Evrington is usually matched by Svindler ? whether it is 13% or 26% how does it alter the fact that investors have been taken for a ride?

[25october1969] 17/12/2014 09:18

beeezz - why the lies, RA does not hold 26% of VLS. Check the facts and get it right before posting



=13.11%

[new tech] 15/12/2014 08:53

Says nothing about me.

[norbus] 11/12/2014 17:00

bz

I see PHE succumbing to gravity after some excessively aggressive punts to push the share price up the day they RNS's; Says a lot about new tech and the bunch driving pump and dump

[norbus] 10/12/2014 16:29

It is therefore in their interest to facilitate whatever the Board want to achieve.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
That was never the intent; They are cheating and would love to see a group of activists hammering the NOMAD; Cantor Fitzgerals, a rich firm, is in with ACTA
ACTA CEO just resigned, and the board as a whole sprayed dream dust over investors
which should have been checked by NOMAD

[hereford29] 10/12/2014 15:27

Yes, I understand this, Nomads are paid by the company board, not the shareholders, while technically they are acting for the shareholders this is only true where the shareholders are the majority owners and therefore the ones who can pay them. They don't act for the small shareholders nor do they represent their interests in any way, they are on the payroll because of the Board. It is therefore in their interest to facilitate whatever the Board want to achieve.

[beeezzz] 10/12/2014 15:14

Jam....Lanstead....Do not want it to go above the 13.33p share price otherwise they will be loosing money....if below AFC loose money...so both as you can see from the plethora of RNS lately...AFC is trying to big up the #SP

[norbus] 10/12/2014 12:23

It is NOT legal, but not all breaches are caught or even looked for or policed ; regulators are toothless and your protectors on AIM, the NOMADs who has to safeguard the corner of the absent shareholder could not give a damn once their fees are paid.

[hereford29] 10/12/2014 12:01

oh I see, why don't you just ask Ian Balchin then Norbus? He is on LinkedIn. Anyway he isn't anything to do with AFC any more is he? In fact they are all on LinkedIn, Adam Bond is also, so you can just contact them directly. Easy enough to get their mobile numbers as well. I still think it is a bad attitude, telling me that news always gets leaked so I shouldn't be surprised. I don't see how it is legal to run placements in this manner, but I suppose it must be.

[beeezzz] 10/12/2014 11:30

H29....This obviously means that after achieving their 12 month milestone 18 months ago, which they trumpeted from the roof tops was not all it was cracked up to be, I have been saying this all along something was not right and they have continued to perfect the system, why they cannot be more forthcoming with their shareholders is beyond me and AIM regulators by the look of it.

The proof in the pudding will be when they get this out in the real world and demonstrate it can compete with other generators.. Until then the share price will languish between 10 - 13p which is where Lanstead want it.

NB...I agree with your comments....at least we have got rid of one blood sucking board member....thats saving AFC over £250K....Why he thinks he's worth that amount of money...AIM directors all seem to be cut from the same cloth with a superciliousness attitude to their shareholders. .

[ianous] 10/12/2014 11:26

Norbus thinks I'm Ian Balchin ex board member at AFC. I've told him before I'm not but he likes to believe it and who am I to make a sad old man even sadder.I guess because we share the same first name in Norbus's mind we must therfore be the same person.

[hereford29] 10/12/2014 10:40

Dear Norbus, I don't understand why you address the poster Ianous as a Board Member? Do you mean that one of the members of the Management Board of AFC is posting on this share chat site? Which one is it? Please can you explain because I am confused by your postings. thank you.

[hereford29] 10/12/2014 10:04

This is a company that thinks it is normal for information about a proposed placement to be leaked in advance, routinely misses it's deadlines and awards it's managements free shares as an "incentive" - great incentive, nice, do nothing and lose nothing, do nothing and luck out and get rich. Very good governance, very fair on private investors. I'm very disappointed with my shareholding and I can only keep it and hope in the future that someone with integrity and a strong work ethic buys the company before it is run into the ground.