We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eicom | LSE:EIC | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B139BP28 | ORD 0.5P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 0.35 | - | 0.00 | 00:00:00 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | N/A | 0 |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
25/2/2008 11:02 | Ready to pay for your crimes yet? | legal aid | |
25/2/2008 08:45 | Legal Aid - 24 Feb'08 - 15:59 - 11931 of 11931 Lets look at that again. You're the one who refers to himself as a "King" and you have the audacity to call me delusional. Legal Aid you clearly are delusional. It seems you are simply here to troll. You have gone back through the posts, found some allegations against the company and rehashed them as fact without a shred of proof. So Legal, please tell me, what would you call someone who posts on bulletin boards making wild accusations with no proof? Show us the proof and we might take you seriously. | temporary | |
24/2/2008 15:59 | Lets look at that again. You're the one who refers to himself as a "King" and you have the audacity to call me delusional. ??? | legal aid | |
24/2/2008 10:50 | Can I see my mistake? No. Can you see you're delusional? We can! | king rat | |
24/2/2008 10:16 | Hello Raty, I'm very well - thankyou for asking. You really don't have to provide these fake cover stories for "Temporary" especially when you're not fooling anybody. (can you see your mistake?) As they say a thief is a thief is a thief. I'm also sure that when you come to learn his real identity - you'll no doubt find he's just the same category of winker as you are. You should look to form a partnership and create an "incompetent trio". | legal aid | |
24/2/2008 09:08 | This company barely makes revenue, let alone profits. It's a combination of a bunch of businesses that should have been put of their misery years ago and which will never generate enough income to cover their costs, even if they were not being run by idiots. It's sadly typical of Lighthouse's/Legal Aid's inability to face the truth that he still cannot accept that he made a bad decision (several bad decisions, in fact) to buy shares in a rubbish company. His self-worth seems so fragile that he has to keep trying to convince himself that buying the shares was a good decision and the fact that it has all gone horribly wrong is not in any way his fault. Oh and Temporary, he does have shares - many more than anyone else that posts here, in fact, and must have lost a big five-figure number on this investment. Funnily enough, his last big tip before EIC was MONI. Most people who had made repeated errors on this scale would have realised that investment wasn't their thing, and that they should hand over management of their money to someone competent to do so, but Lighthouse/Legal Aid seems to prefer delusions to facing up to that reality. King Rat | king rat | |
22/2/2008 17:13 | Who has the biggest holding of shares? With a Mcap of just 420k wouldn't take a lot to get rid of the these 2 if thats what you wish to do. Looking back over the RNS's, Eicom have never made a profit, just losses with the need to go cap in hand for more funds so often that the cash burn must be killing any forward movement. Has Eicom got a future not sure. Will see when the next request comes for even more funds. Regards NewKid | newkid | |
21/2/2008 18:43 | And for Legal Aid to make himself look foolish takes some doing :-) | temporary | |
21/2/2008 16:35 | Legal Aid - 21 Feb'08 - 14:49 - 11920 of 11920 Jbat Now your blathering is daft Read again - I never professed to know who or what the "TCF" are - and hence the use of the inverted comma's. Please take the time to read what you talking about, and be sure to know what it means! Talk about pot and kettle! Legal Aid show us the proof for all the claims you make. | temporary | |
21/2/2008 14:49 | Jbat Now your blathering is daft Read again - I never professed to know who or what the "TCF" are - and hence the use of the inverted comma's. Please take the time to read what you talking about, and be sure to know what it means! | legal aid | |
21/2/2008 14:23 | Hi Jbat That is not how I read it but I am quite willing to accept you could well be correct. At least you provide proof to back up what you are saying unlike Legal Aid. | temporary | |
21/2/2008 13:23 | TCF is deliberately vague. Yes, it is mainly intended to stop retail networks and providers ripping off consumers, but the FSA also regulates stockmarket transactions, investigates insider dealing, share manipulation and fraud. It's like jailing Al Capone for tax evasion - it may not be precisely what he should have been jailed for, but at least he's there, sitting in clink! As a listed company, Eicom are (as I understand it) obliged to treat their investors fairly in the same way that an insurance company has to treat an investor buying an investment bond from them - fairly. This is part and parcel of being a PLC - you are supplying an investment to the public via the medium of the LSE. If you bought EIC via a stockbroker (lol!) on an advisory basis, he would be responsible for his (abysmal) advice, but EIC (and technically the LSE too) are obliged to treat customers fairly. Hence, TCF..... Legal Aid - your blathering is as daft as the man who came into my office and started lecturing me in the role of the 'IFA' as the UK regulator when in fact he meant the 'FSA'. If you will use abbreviations, do make sure you know what they mean! | jbat | |
21/2/2008 11:18 | Surprise surprise. But a thief like you, wouldn't want anyone to think it applied to EIC would you? After all you also wouldn't want the "TCF" or anyone else investigating what you have been doing over the past 7 years. It's terrifying to think that they might / will find, especially because you haven't done anything which could be explained as in the shareholders interests. Quite the opposite in fact - 'Payback Time' for all your dishonesty. | legal aid | |
21/2/2008 11:06 | Hi Jbat I had never heard of TCF so I did a quick google. Under the FAQ links it has this: "My firm has not had any contact with you on TCF. Does that mean my firm is exempt from TCF? No. TCF applies to all firms in the retail supply chain. We will be assessing firms' compliance with TCF as part of our ongoing supervisory and thematic work." I don't think this applies to EIC | temporary | |
21/2/2008 10:39 | Wow ratty's still about, long time no see!! | scaleyman | |
21/2/2008 09:24 | i would say well done all round............... | spitfire3 | |
21/2/2008 09:23 | hit it lads...... | spitfire3 | |
21/2/2008 09:22 | well deals to be signed.....?????? | spitfire3 | |
21/2/2008 09:06 | Jbat, Exactly what area of financial services do you think EIC operate in? Or have the FSA secretly been given power over all businesses in every sector? Further, has the FSA secretly extended TCF to include shareholders in their definition of 'customers'? I think we should be told. King Rat | king rat | |
21/2/2008 08:23 | Temporary - 20 Feb'08 - 17:16 - 11905 of 11912 As far as Option 2 is concerned I didn't think being incompetent was actually something the FSA could do much about. They can indeed - I work in the 'industry' myself. It's not just about not ripping people off - if you run an FSA regulated business in a shoddy way, you are likely to get a knock on the door from enforcement - but only if someone actually TELLS them about it! Have you heard of TCF? It's the FSA's move towards principle-based rather than rules-based regulation. It stands for 'Treating Customers Fairly'. This applies to clients and to shareholders alike. The FSA can take action against any firm it regulates simply on the basis that there is a manifest cause showing that the firm did not 'treat its customers fairly'. It's that broad. | jbat |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions