Asian Growth Properties Share Discussion Threads

[holdontight] 25/11/2005 21:08

I dont think many realise just how bad this potentially is for AIM and Stock Market in general. The lies, deceipt and corruption are rife and regulation is required that corrects injustices....LGB is a superb example, but they are not on their own. I tell you this, we can have war after war, terrorism, hurricans and political assasinations, but the market ultimately will take itself out.....unless it rids itself of being open to such corruption.

The private investor WILL ultimately bring this about...the question is when and how many more lives ruined in the mean time.

This thread or sth similar needs be top of ADVFN all day every day for anyone to even start taking notice. Costly law suits are one thing, but exposure costs the perpetrators more and PI nothing.

[call-logger] 25/11/2005 11:48

Up the creek?

[holdontight] 25/11/2005 10:07

LGB holders, where are you?

[brooksky] 10/11/2005 19:13

Bioprogress old ceo Graham Hind should go to jail like the AIT directors for his over statements and false promises.

The case is very very similar and would not be suprised to hear that the FSA were knocking on his door soon.

Announced figures then two weeks later issues a profit warning plus many many other over statements and potential lies!.

The thread is a good idea imho

[holdontight] 04/11/2005 19:30

Well, some interesting responses.

[mikepstevens] 04/11/2005 09:07

holdontite........v good topic for debate tho....i like these

- Always under promise/over deliver
- Always say what you KNOW rather than GUESS what you dont
- Don't state your opinion as fact
- Don't tell lies or mislead

..........the imprisonment of AIT former ceo & fd for issuing a false rns has served as a timely reminder to directors of all listed co's

[ianwc] 04/11/2005 08:15

I don't think this is the right kind of forum to be encouraging.

Vast majority of investors using this site don't really understand what constitutes a serious breach of directors duties. the amount of times i have seen investor(s) harping on about a company complaining they were duped when the only person duped was themselves for not researching properly and not taking the much publicised advice to limit your exposure to penny stocks.

Personally, I would far rather see investors making more of an effort to understand what they are invested in, building up strong networks in the investment community, and most of all, really making an effort to meet the management of companies they are interested in.

Sure there are some companies that need to be brought to the attention of the FSA, but they are far fewer than most bulletin boards suggest. The more shareholder action groups there are roaming around harrasing companies, the less those same companies will want any contact with any retail investment. That would be a mistake and bad news for all investors.

imo. dyor.

[jimmyloser] 04/11/2005 07:01

I am with Wolfhound, having spent numerous hours over the last few weeks with top rate solicitors ensuring that EVERY word is watertight before release, solicitors are in my opinion, first rate and unbiased, they do not leave anything open that will come back on themselves.

A decent idea, I could fill a sheet from Medisys alone, but perhaps they will be more emotional than factual!!

[wolfhound] 04/11/2005 06:51

I have been involved as Director in a number of listings and you always have at least two groups of lawyers at the "Verification Meeting". One lot for the company/board and the other for the sponsering broker. The prospectus is gone over line by line and each statment is listed together with the party or parties verifying that statment. The lawyers want to see documentation backing up any statement of fact. All of this is filed away in case someone tries to sue. Some statements will be of opinion such as " The Directors are of the opinion that there is a worthwhile prospect to be drilled at Blogsville."

It is nigh on impossible to sue someone for that statement. They are saying it as an opinion not a fact and they almost certanly have some of their own money invested in the company so it is very difficult to prove it is reckless. Also there will be some third party report from consulting geologists indicating that it is a reasonable statement. (You shop around for consulting geologists until you get the opinion you want.

In short,absent manifest fraud you haven't got a hope!

[Abuse team] 04/11/2005 03:20

Post removed by ADVFN

[marksp] 04/11/2005 03:15

Go to a US stockholders meeting and listen to the ten minutes of caveats before they even offer you coffee...the end result is that they say " everything after this is a wild guess and should be ignored so don't try a sue me....Now lets talk about the balance sheet" The D&O insurers will determine
the format of information provided or, you will get the US things.....give them hundreds of pages of data...I am sure something might be useful

Great idea. it will take us a long way

[holdontight] 04/11/2005 00:16

I agree obviously, so help me spread the WORD!!!!

[andy] 04/11/2005 00:10

holdontight,

An excellent idea for a thread IMO.

As others have already pointed out, there have to be some parameters.

A stock held for some years, where directors had been re-elected would probably not qualify, whereas a small company that had made promises it had not kept within a short timeframe, say a year, or two, WOULD qualify I feel.

I have felt for some time that private investors should group together to have a voice that can, and is, heard.

[holdontight] 03/11/2005 23:55

Apply whatever complaint you have to buying a car, a loaf of bread, membership at local health club etc etc and if there is a discrepancy then there is most likely a case. Not all the time, but certainly more than at present!! And SOMEONE has to get the justice process started, which I have opted for!!

Tedious it may well turn out to be!!

[call-logger] 03/11/2005 23:51

But you say that if you invest on " unfulfilled promises and statements of intent... then you have reason to complain."

So whose fault is it that the promises were unfulfilled?

The directors?

But you own the company. You vote them in every three years.

So were you negligent in not realising they weren't fulfilling their promises?

[holdontight] 03/11/2005 23:36

That would be for their solicitors to argue and prove....not the point at all of my thread!

[call-logger] 03/11/2005 23:31

Not this way, I fear

Say if Marks and Sparks announce that they plan to open 200 shops
by 2012 and only manage 150, you would expect to be compensated?

by whom?

M&S?

You'd have owned it fot 7 years and had all the chances you needed to question your directors on the progress of the claim and vote them out if they were failing. If you hadn't spotted that they weren't going to meet the target then perhaps you have to share the blame?

[holdontight] 03/11/2005 23:19

I have recently responded to an LGB action group thread and this is what got me started on this subject. What is clear to me is that the issue is NOT limited to LGB.....it is industry-wide.

Now, how many of you are in industry sectors where the following, as initial examples of standards, apply?...

- Always under promise/over deliver
- Always say what you KNOW rather than GUESS what you dont
- A repeat customer is worth more than a first time one
- Don't state your opinion as fact
- Don't tell lies or mislead

Just 5 basics to start with...feel free to add as required!

However, I do believe that a change to this contrived and ultimately damned industry can be achieved.....by the required level of corrective Action Groups whose members are prepared to invest and stand up and be counted.

If you have invested your hard earned money in the UK stock market on the basis of (potential) lies, ambiguous statements, unfulfilled promises and statements of intent, falsified accounts and financial outlook statements etc then you absolutely have reason to complain! This thread is there to provide a "once and for all medium" for this to take place and the contents will, as a minimum, be forwarded to the FSA quarterly. If the response received is sufficient, in terms of both quality and quantity, then I also hope to extend to law firms for guidance as a minimum.


However, the ultimate objective is even more proactive....to collectively challenge, ethically and legally, those CEO's, CFO's, Nominated Advisors and Market Makers who seem only to exist in support of such. This may/will require financial as well as written/vocal support!!

I will develop the thread and the introductory comments as time goes...!

The small investor CAN win ........ if the small investor WANTS TO ENOUGH!!

[kermit] 31/5/2005 08:25

take over talk in the express at the weekend

[latifs100] 27/5/2005 12:46

back up to 27-28 up 3 today.. any reason?