||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
Managed Support Services Share Discussion Threads
Showing 2601 to 2622 of 2625 messages
|True to form, as always!|
Also, you didn't tell us (again!) who you're accusing of fraud.|
Yet again you dodge the question.
WHY DO YOU DEFEND BEART, HE'S CAUSED THIS COMPANY TO FAIL?
Just answer the question.
By the way, I make plenty from share dealing (and other business interests) and I certainly don't need any advice from you, the one who thinks Beart's done well. One of us has blinkers on, that's for sure!!!!
Now, answer the question.
Oh yes, and as Toad said, show us your trading slips, no one believes anything you claim about your dealings.|
if you didn`t make money out of MSS you are the fool,
you have only your self to blame, take the blinkers off,
you are emotionally attached to MSS never a good recipe
for inversting in the stock market. keep your money in the bank.
You are a deluded fool. Simple Simon is a hapless wannabe who did nothing like play this one by the book. And your claim that someone who inherits a company with £13m in the bank has the odds stacked against him is frankly laughable.
If you truly believe the halfwit gave everyone an exit route, speak to the institutions like I have. They utterly despise him. In fact he's been told in no uncertain terms never to show his face in the city again!!
The bumbling fool has consistently made outlandish and untrue claims of fraud by the previous board which have all been proven to be completely untrue, following an extensive criminal investigation. The man is a hopeless loser who was entirely responsible for this company failing. No one else is to blame.
So given your comment about "blatant fraud", exactly who are you accusing? The previous board have been completely cleared by the SFO, as you well know. So who are you referring to?
I've been doing some digging around and Beart has now been involved in the takovers of three companies, XKO, MSS & the takeover of Gresham by Parkwood. On every occasion he seems to subsequently find fraud or wrongdoing by previous boards or directors. Now, either Simple Simon is the unluckiest person ever in the history of corporate deals, or perhaps he finds it convenient to uncover dark deeds. Strangely, all of his claims about wrongdoing in all of the above three companies were subsequently proven to be baseless.
Now, regarding you. Despite what you say, you have never given an answer as to why you stubbornly defend the indefensible. Beart is a failure who is entirely responsible for what happened to MSS. He was in charge for 5 years (longer than anyone) taking an enormous and undeserved salary, during which time the shares plunged lower and lower.
The previous board are irrelevant so stop referring to them, they've been cleared, why do you defend Beart? Just answer the question.|
i have allready given you the answers, in short SB`s previouse company
made me a shed load of money, and i mean a shed load.
he played this one by the book, but the odds were allways stacked against him.
if you can`t understand that check out AIM you will find it scattered with blatent fraud. with shareholders in tatters. at least SB gave every one an exit rout.
You genuinely baffle me. Simple Simon Beart, the buffoon who was in charge of this company for 5 times longer than anyone else, is completely responsible for its failure.
When he gained control there was c£13m in the bank and the company had contracts and customers. He sacked staff unnecessarily, closed profitable businesses, wrongly claiming they were loss making and upset so many suppliers and customers that nobody wanted to deal with him. His strategy for the business was so poor that despite the assets he inherited, he failed completely. Even his own chairman was utterly dismayed by his actions and his FD, who he brought with him, resigned after a matter of weeks.
Yet you still bleat on about members of the old board. In all these years I've never once seen you criticise Bumbling Beart on any occasion.
If you are posting on this BB for genuine reasons, there is no way you would have ignored Beart's abject failures. The only logical conclusion is that you have a connection with Beart that you won't admit. Why else would you refuse to accept that he's a failure and keep referring back to people who haven't been involved for over 5 years.
Your recent post is yet another example.
Why didn't you post anything about the criminal case being dropped without any evidence of wrong doing being found?
The AADB have based their decision on "evidence" supplied by Beart, someone who has clearly demonstrated he cannot be relied upon. Hunt is currently appealing the ruling. The same "evidence" was supplied by Beart to the SFO who, after an investigation that lasted nearly five years, concluded it was without any foundation or merit.
In fact, the investigation (if you can call it that) carried out by the AADB was totally flawed, because it didn't include evidence from most of the former advisors and most of the former directors. They were all prevented from taking part in the AADB's "investigation" because of the ongoing criminal investigation being conducted by the SFO. This was exactly the same problem with the investigation carried out several years ago by the AIM team, it only included "evidence" supplied by Beart, who clearly cannot be relied upon and who is hardly impartial!
It may interest you to know that the neither the SFO, the AADB or AIM have been able to find anyone credible who can corroborate Beart's claims. Don't you find that significant?
The same accusations that Hunt has been reprimanded for, of misleading investors in several matters, has been investigated by the SFO, who are the only body who have looked at all the evidence from all parties. They concluded there is no evidence on all counts.
The article you've posted above is a meaningless piece of tripe, poorly written by a journalist who clearly failed to carry out any meaningful investigations into the story. If he had, he would be looking into Beart and the utter rubbish he's fed gullible journalists over the years.
This story has not yet finished, believe me. Simple Simon is in for a very rough ride over the coming years, he better have a good lawyer and very very deep pockets!
Come clean Windy, tell us why you keep supporting Beart.|
|any news of SB? did he find a job?|
|May 14, 2012 9:55 pm
Worthington director given accounts ban
By Duncan Robinson
A former finance director of Worthington Nicholls has been excluded from the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales for six years after producing "materially false and misleading" financial statements.
The ban is the second-longest achieved by the Accountancy and Actuarial Discipline Board.
On this story
Stiffer fines for audit misconduct proposed
Ex-Worthington Nicholls finance chief probed
PwC fined £1.4m for audit failure
IN Financial Services
Peregrine chief charged on forged accounts
Inquiry launched into RSM Tenon
Poland's Amber Gold to liquidate
Analysts toughen stance on corporate India
Timothy Hunt was found to have presented misleading interim accounts in June 2007 by including £770,000 of turnover at the air conditioning installation and maintenance group for which he had no evidence, according to the AADB.
An independent tribunal also concluded that Mr Hunt failed to prevent the release of misleading information to investors before a share placement by Worthington Nicholls worth £20m.
"The sanction reflects the gravity of the misconduct and Mr Hunt's refusal to accept responsibility for his actions for the last three years," said Tom Martin, executive counsel at AADB.
Richard Jones QC, who chaired the tribunal, said that Mr Hunt "fell short of the standards expected of a professional accountant."
In May 2007, Mr Hunt allowed a share placement letter containing misleading information to be released to the market, the tribunal found.
The letter claimed "current trading is strong" and that there was "strong trading momentum in the group's current business". But the group had a net cash outflow of £285,000 a week and was reliant on external funding, according to the AADB. The subsequent share placement raised £20m.
AADB argued that as Mr Hunt was the sole qualified accountant on the board, he was in a unique position to recognise the company's financial position.
Mr Martin said: "Mr Hunt has been party to misleading regulatory news service announcements and, more seriously, issuing a set of misleading interim accounts for Worthington Nicholls Group."
The company was admitted to the small-cap Aim index in June 2006. The shares were priced at 50p in an initial public offering through Corporate Synergy, the now-defunct broker. They peaked at 193p in April 2007, giving the group a market capitalisation of £146m.
By August the share price had plunged almost 90 per cent to 20p after a series of profit warnings. It ended the year with a market capitalisation of £12.5m.
The group was renamed Managed Support Services after it was taken over in late 2007 by a turnround group led by Simon Beart.
It sold its health and safety and water divisions to Capita and its facilities management division to Rentokil Initial last year.
It now operates, in effect, as a cash shell, according to Mr Beart, its chief executive.
Mr Hunt's counsel declined to comment.|
|There is definitely some deal being worked at in the back ground to make it into a mining stock|
|Good entry point is all I can say. Peter Redmond is the key to reverse take over and becoming the mining company.|
|Desperate to get out?
saud2237 3 Apr'12 - 12:19 - 2507 of 2562
Take over for 1.5 million
|Tick up imminent|
|0.5 about to be taken out !|
|1 hour to go ! Exciting day ahead|
|Only 1 market maker on 0.5 so can really see this taking off tomorrow|
|We will find out soon !|
|Just spoke to someone from the City and apparently there may be some link up between leeds resources and kennedy venture. Peter Redmond is the key here. As always DYOR.|
|fund what is your source?|
|If the placing is 2.5bn shares at 0.02p, then paying 0.04p seems very poor value. Still another 50% drop to come until this is fairly priced.
Edit- current market cap £1.1m vs cash £0.4m? Is that correct?|
|there are rumours of a deal . let the weak old holders get out ,then .........|
|thats more like it, share price comming down nicely.