Invu Share Discussion Threads

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 17:21

anyone reading my posts
Im not discussing the share price or what I think it should or shouldnt be
Im raising some concerns about what happened in the past, which was possibly fraudulent and intentional....
and whether all links to that have been cut....or not

and the role the chairman played in that...and whether he should have left then
and whether the chairmans role in what has happened since breaks any regulations or should be investigated

eg. appears he might end up owning or controlling all of the A shares and one could argue the company....and whether that take over was done in a legal and correct manner

I note that issuing A shares appears to have got round any need to involve the take over panel....inferring that it was perhaps an intentional takeover process...intentionally done in a way to sidestep the controls/rules.

And hence, has the chairman been involved in the processes over the last 10 years of INVU ...that UK investors have coughed up perhaps 40M pnds..
did he co-operate with the use of false accounts ?
did he benefit from the use of false accounts, did he sell into the resulting high share price ?
..and he perhaps ends up owning the company with current cap. value of around 2M.....especially if the 2M is a small part of any larger gain he made in previous years if he sold a lot of shares at a high price and that perhaps still has X million left from past sales of INVU shares. I dont know, just asking the question. And perhaps all without any shareholder being aware of anything !.

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 17:12

David Morgan left in disgrace.

INVU gave him 5M shares a few years later in return for a debt not paid. 2012 or 2013 accounts

What was that about ?

2008 False accounts, shareholders lose bucket loads, directors leave in disgrace but INVU is still trading with one of the disgraced directors !!!!

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 17:09

Shares in group undertakings. p37 of accounts.
31M

Does that infer that UK investors coughed up 31M pnds during share issues to them by INVU ? (large part of that using accounts numbers that were false and inflated. Intentionally ? Intentional fleecing of UK investors ? It could be argued that SHore Capital fleeced UK investors in the IPO of OCH, again using accounts that were rigged/false...SHore Capital were one of the big sellers in the IPO of OCH

OCH now has a shareholder action group....involved in the administration process of OCH...in Canary Islands, yes ! shareholders are represented !
directors at OCH tried to put the co. in their pocket in return for their unpaid salaries
false accounts imo. claimed NAV of tens of millions, listed cap. value was 3M, no one believed the accounts !...into adminstration, so appears that the accounts were in fact false, the NAV of tens of millions was not real

same as at INVU, the sales of 10M did not exist, 2008/9 and was then declared as false)

Shore Capital closely involved with both companies !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[stockologist] 13/11/2013 16:59

Just adds further to my distaste for investing in Chinese and Israeli companies on AIM (you can include US oil and gas companies as well).

They have perfectly adequate capital markets why do they need to come to the UK to fleece gullible and naive AIM mug punters ? Ahh...

Most recent examples I have seen are SWAP and PTV but am sure there are plenty of others and we've all been there.

http://www.moneyweek.com/investment-advice/penny-shares/penny-sleuth-why-i-dont-buy-chinese-stocks-on-aim-60618

Why I don't buy Chinese stocks on AIM

By Tom Bulford

Sep 18, 2012


Greg Rudd, the brother of the former Australian prime minister, once met a Chinese businessman who gave him some prudent advice.

"You tend to see the good in people, Mr Rudd", he started. "People like you. You laugh a lot. But you'll never make money in China with that attitude. You'll only be taken advantage of. People will trade off you. They won't pay you. The number one rule of doing business in China is this; never trust a Chinaman. Why would you as a foreigner trust a Chinese businessman when we as Chinese don't trust each other?"

Now that advice is pretty close to the bone. But I've said it before in Penny Sleuth – you have to be very careful when you invest in a Chinese company. The record of AIM-listed Chinese companies is simply awful. And with so many still coming to market, there is a real chance that many private investors will end up making some very expensive mistakes...

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 16:58

Chairman reveals he is a beneficiary of 2 of the main holders of Ord. shares

but does not mention that he is a beneficiary of 100% of the A shares.....
noting that the A shares were issued in the past.

Is the RNS perhaps a lie, and perhaps the chairman has been a beneficiary ALL the time but just never wanted to tell anyone....otherwise the issue of the A shares would have been a different process ?

Why is that basic important fact not revealed in the RNS ?!!!!

ord. shareholders stitched up ?
Major transaction taken place, issue of A shares, while keeping basic important information secret from shareholders ?
Ord. shareholders put up the money to create or grow the company via share issues....but the directors and the chairman intentionally did not invite them to take part in the issue of A shares and kept key data secret from them in that process !


Anyone got the phone number for the FSA ?!!
------

Can the chairman now sell the subsidiaries to himself..or a trust where he is actually behind it (but not declare it ) ..and then wind up the holding company
and ord. shareholders get virtually nothing despite having paid in millions at past share issues ?

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 16:46

Cliff
How do you intend to vote btw ?

Anyone else out there willing to offer any opinion and/or reveal their voting intention ?

Anyone suffer from the 2008/9 false accounts scandal ...no action group formed then ....no requests for an investigation sent to the FSA ?

Anyone any opinion on whether it is justifiable that the chairman stayed after the false accounts scandal ?
Anyone ever met him ?
----

I note that the 2 current execs. arrived AFTER the accounts scandal...and departure of the previous 2 execs.

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 16:34

Should the 375k loan should not be included in the list of debts and in the calculation of shareholders assets ?
(it appears in one of the notes to the accounts)

It is not.
Why not ?

(if include it then the shareholder assets reduces by 375k)

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 16:30

Are the exec. dirs. co-operating with whatever happens at INVU
because they have received options for 5% of the poweful A shares

and as a result have the dirs. complied with their duty under the Company Act to act in benefit of all shareholders (which was ONLY the ord. shareholders at the time of the issue of the A shares) and to safeguard the co. assets (and not give them to the "A shareholders" just cause they got 5%)

---

(dirs. options are at 1.75p ?
dont worry, option prices can be changed in an instant)

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 16:27

Are shareholders aware that the "A shareholders" are probably all located in Israel
and the shares linked to the Chairman
others ?

whereas previous to the issue of the A shares I assume it was controlled by UK located investors.

that UK investors perhaps put up many millions of pounds in previous cash raisings
...but that in the end the co. looks to be ending up in the hands of people living in Israel...for a low price..without them ever having any inkling....after it having cost UK people many many millions to create it

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 16:21

The INVU company broker/adviser is WH Ireland Ltd.

They have had a very chequered last 12 months....due to breaking rules and regulations.

"Last year, WH Ireland was contacted by the Financial Services Authority in relation to a high-profile insider trading investigation.

It was one of several institutions to be asked for information on trading by the FSA, according to people familiar with the regulator's "Operation Tabernula" investigation."



"Tyler left the company in mid-December a day after Compton, amid reports the duo were being investigated over their personal share dealings."

hxxp://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/wh-ireland-hit-by-four-more-departures-after-shock-compton-exit/a651506

"Compton left the business with immediate effect in December, and reports suggested there was a row over his personal share dealing.
The head of the Cardiff office was also suspended "

hxxp://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/wh-ireland-names-killingbeck-as-ceo-after-shock-compton-exit/a650819

..one guess is ...being caught for insider dealing

WH Ireland bt. part of Seymour Pierce. I recall that share price were fined for improper conduct in the past.
UK Brokers licensed to do IPOs, a shady bunch imo, a lot of fines or slapped wrists or dubious goings on.

....the attraction of large amounts of easy money...the attraction can often be enough to get people to break the rules.

----
INVU chairman is closely involved with Shore Capital (Shore Cap. lent the co. 500k once)...he sits on the board of one of their funds etc
...for honesty and honourable conduct, my score for Shore Capital is 0/10 based on their role in various IPOs etc

...btw one IPO they did raised about 12M...and they put 9M of it into a Shore Capital fund !!
I doubt the IPO told investors that that was the plan
...so Shore Cap. would get a cut from the IPO and then a on-going cut from running their fund
...tech. funds floated in the last 10-15 years....so many have been a complete scam
...the burnt investors and defunct companies created are proof...while the brokers and the co. directors made loads of money.
----

Shore Capital and the Chairman and all of the "A share" holders

all look like Isreali linked or based or controlled entities
...many UK people wont touch Israeli linked companies 'cause of past experiences of problems with accounts etc....while many will....high tech. skills for small country

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 15:29

BTW
todays RNS is only because someone has sent a complaint to the regulators

;-)

and imo the regulator has forced the company to issue the RNS

if the regulator does anything as a result of any other part of the complaint, wait to see, generally the AIM/FSA/FCC regulators do nothing.....whereas in the USA they are a bit more active and they do fine people and for serious cases issue prison sentences, almost never happens in the UK

What other regulations have they not complied with and needs the regulator to give them a prod ?

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 15:28

Considering the false accounts back in 2008/9, how can the chairman ....that was there then

still be the chairman now ??

He was an integral part of what happened.

and is there something underhand going on in that he is linked, or controls, to 100% of the A shares ?

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 15:26

Cliff
DO you know the story regards Montague Ltd ?

It used to be a major shareholder I think, owned perhaps by David Morgan, the previous MD.
It is now imo a part of INVU.

Did INVU buy it, and hence buy the shares of David Morgan ?
If this happened, was it at a high price, based on high EPS, based on false sales and false accounts ?
If so, should DM pay back that money ?

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 15:20

Cliff, how you going to vote ?

[riggedmarkets] 13/11/2013 15:13

Cliff
How long have you been a shareholder ?

Looking at the paperwork creates some questions for me
1) The company has just declared that the chairman has an interest in X % of the shares. A major amount.

And a result, which they have not declared is that, imo, the Chairman has an interst in 100% of the A shares !!

BUT
this was not revealed to ord. shareholders when they were asked to vote on the issue of the A shares.

Was the issue of the A shares ILLEGAL ...since basic information seems to have been intentionally hidden from shareholders. ie. that the chairman was so closely linked to 100% of the new A shares.

2) The accounting revelations in approx. 2008 imo looked like revelation of blatent fraud.
(the accounts had said that they had had sales of X (high) , but that they had not yet been paid. That created a high number for receivables but also a high level for profit since the sales were counted as having happened, just not yet paid for. So, a high EPS and hence a high share price Hence a high share price for any new share issues.

Then, the company declared that the reported sales had ...in fact....NEVER HAPPENED !!

The share price hence collapsed.

Where the 2 prev. exec. dirs. investigated as a result ?
If not, why not ?

Appears to me, that everyone who ever bought shares had a right to their money back.

3) Further to point 2, were the share issues also fraudulent and intentionally so since they used financial data which the directors, and imo the chairman, knew to be false. Hence the share price was artificially inflated...to intentionally fleece anyone subscribing for shares.

4) Did any directors or the chairman sell shares in any cash raising, or at any other time, pre- 2009 when the false accounting was revealed
in order to obtain personal cash benefit, ie. intentionally rip off new investors, knowing the accounting method and hence numbers were false ?

5) The 2 execs. were thrown out.
Why was the chairman not thrown out as well ?
He was an integral part imo.

6) Were shareholders intentionally tricked in the issue of the A shares ?.
By the chairman being linked to 100% of the new shares
and the wording of the conditions being intention to trick ord. shareholders.
The wording says that the A shares are equal to the ord. shares.

BUT
the co. paperwork also says that any distributions to shareholders will be proportional to capital. this is normal.
And
an A share has cap. value of .01p
while an ord. share has a cap. value 10 TIMES lower, 0.001p

hence it appears that ord. shareholders get virtually nothing compared to A shareholders, 10 times less.

while ord. shareholders think, imo falsely, they get equal distribution since the paperwork says 'equal', "pari passu"

7) If any scam or fraud has been committed, is de-listing a good way to protect the big shareholders and the chairman (linked to 100% of the priority A shares) from the AIM regulators and the FSA/FCC ?
(since these 2 are already overloaded due to widespread dodgy dealings on AIM and small staff numbers....if they havent got time to investigate every dodgy AIM deal then they sure havent got time to look at small unlisted companies....and various rules will then apply....
and if some rules were broken when on AIM....they wont have power to apply AIM penalties etc AFTER a company has de-listed.

[cliffpeat] 13/11/2013 07:20

EGM 19 November.

If you are voting by proxy - or if you need a proxy from your SIPP or other fund manager in order to attend and vote, you only have a few days to put in place.

[topinfo] 07/11/2013 16:31

750k buy INVU told yas

Right before the bell so punters couldnt do anything about it and buy in.

Bodes well for 2moro

[topinfo] 07/11/2013 14:46

.3395 now to buy INVU. Here we go....NO buys shown up yet but I bet they will do soon...delayed

[topinfo] 07/11/2013 14:45

Buy order being worked here IMO

Someone is buying in the background at INVU IMO and a buy order being worked. Try buy, they want 0.335 just small amounts but quite happy to pay way over bid for sells.

[flasher2] 07/11/2013 14:01

howard, give it a rest, people took the risk, some made money, some didn't, some lost out. Buying and selling on AIM is risky.

[29howard] 06/11/2013 14:51

Topinfo

Still waiting for you to explain how ramping TVZ from 10p+ to a current suspension around 1.3p gives a 1500% gain ?

[topinfo] 06/11/2013 14:47

Watch for a large delayed buy later :)

[cliffpeat] 06/11/2013 13:51

Smithie6 - your post 668.

Lindenhouse.co.uk indicates that they have developed their own competing product they call "Virtual Cabinet"

The uninspiring video on their home page does not indicate any value proposition that is different from INVU or other competitors - nor does it offer the range of add-ons that INVU does. I suspect they are aiming at the smaller enterprise.

Looking at the recent INVU testimonial videos from their user conferences, it would appear that the support and service levels of INVU are high and appreciated.

Your post 650.
Thank you for your analysis - I haven't yet had time to read the circular but will do so today.

I have posted before that the level of directors' remuneration seems very high for such a small company but appreciate that to turn round trading from a loss to a profit has a considerable value.

I still hold and intend to go to the EGM

All my posts are purely personal opinion and everyone should DYOR.