Aminex Share Discussion Threads

[cperkin] 28/6/2018 21:18

nowhere near, is that a fact ron? when its signed it's signed on the day.

[ronwilkes123] 28/6/2018 21:13

The money will only come with the licence. You'll know this is close as the city insider spivs will buy in advance as they'll know it's coming. One would advise it's no where near at the min. Though those with longer memories can remember this going from 2.6p to 5 in about two-three weeks a year ago. Make sure you ask about the psa licence at the agm it's arguably now the no 1 piece everyone is waiting for

[cperkin] 28/6/2018 20:59

Don't disagree with that ron. Licence is everything + the money of course.

[ronwilkes123] 28/6/2018 20:35

I note the market cap of UKOG will soon pass aminex that if nothing else is highly embarrassing Cperkin whoever was the source for that article is neither here nor there. If aminex get at the very least a rumva psa then this changes the whole picture. As the great shorter evil knievil would say 80 million for a whole lot of nothing without a licence

[kryptonsnake] 28/6/2018 20:29

I'm planning a top up in the coming days. Last time I bought around this price it was on its way up to 7p, it will hopefully do the same again.

[kryptonsnake] 28/6/2018 20:26

We could do with a well to drill. Anyone know of any wells we can drill?

[cperkin] 28/6/2018 20:21

What links, are there some? Don't think I ever mentioned any links? Your imagination appears to be running away from you.

[ronwilkes123] 28/6/2018 19:29

I hope he stops with the links between people on here and that article

[ronwilkes123] 28/6/2018 19:13

Don't want you to post anything libellous cperkin - I'm confident that article has nothing to do with. I suggest you leave your links at that

[haggismchaggis] 28/6/2018 18:42

AGM is in 9 trading days. How about the Zubair deal announcement beforehand?

[dunderheed] 28/6/2018 18:33

Yes but you clearly stated you were restricted legally. Can you elucidate please? Why mention it if you cannot explain further?
I didn't even want to discuss legislation YOU brought it up then then said you couldn't discuss further legally, completely offering this information, no one was challenging you on this?!
No one was interested I think!!
PMSL.

[cperkin] 28/6/2018 18:25

I can talk about the legislation dunder but no more than that.

[dunderheed] 28/6/2018 18:23

No it is the comment on lse aex bb that you made that at 12.47 that you appeared to be restricted from discussing any further information legally.
Just wondering like oh and PMSL as well?
Please do confirm matey.

[cperkin] 28/6/2018 18:20

Oh sorry.

No I can talk about the legislation all day long Dunder, what would you like to know? EU law anything greater than 56 bits (not including parity bits) is controlled remember your old 56K modem over a phone line and how slow it was, 56 bits is tiny.
The us are slightly more generous with 64 bits not including parity. After that they have all the relevant details of the encryption and anything not Mass market 5A992 in the CFR has to have an end user undertaking and a Government export licence., and classified as 5A002 or 5D002. However the US have a further subset in CFR 740.17 and in addition the US law applies world wide due to the de minimis legislation governing US technology

[dunderheed] 28/6/2018 18:09

No I am (EDIT) NOT talking about the silly article I am talking about you clearly stating over on lse that you couldn't disclose anymore about govt. tracking of communications without breaking the law.
Sorry second EDIT, PMSL.

[cperkin] 28/6/2018 17:59

Claims? just my opinions dunder, it has after all nothing to do with me. Like I say leave it to legal. You both seem to wish to defend the article, interesting.

[dunderheed] 28/6/2018 17:55

CP you can send me an e mail if u like? I think you're getting quite confused with certain aspects of law, as you appeared to be implying you were bound by some form of law or contract from disclosing information, where had that actually been the case, more often than not, the disclosure of that very fact and issue in itself, could be construed as a contravention and particularly ill advised but, you're the expert and the one making claims, not me buddy. Apologies PMSL.

[cperkin] 28/6/2018 17:50

Depends on if it is factual or has been supplied fully factual information ron, still leave it to legal, they are best with these things :)

[ronwilkes123] 28/6/2018 17:46

Cperkin I don't understand how you can make leading comments like a poster trying to manipulate the market and state no facts. I don't understand how a publication that has been positive previously cannot simply change its tone

[cperkin] 28/6/2018 17:41

Haha dunder, only a little as it happens...checked out CFR 741b(ii) yet..., mass market encryption safe PMSL.

[dunderheed] 28/6/2018 17:38

Yes but can you talk about that CP or is it top secret?! (LOL).
Me I'd want to see something tomorrow rns'd stating that the mgt is aware of factually incorrect information being discussed on Bb's and is seeking legal advice and clarification with regard to this.

[ronwilkes123] 28/6/2018 17:38

How do you mean cperkin manipulate the market with articles ? I'm confused - Phoenix had been positive previously

[cperkin] 28/6/2018 17:34

Best to say nothing and let Legal deal with quietly in the background. Watch for no response whilst it is quietly worked on. Seems a poster likes to manipulate the market with "Articles" from that rag....Get all they deserve.

[blackgold00] 28/6/2018 17:21

of out to see my grandson : ) catch up later