BNN Technology Share Discussion Threads

[highasakite] 06/10/2017 15:47

and you don't mention that Ayesha4 posts are unsubstantiated bile I notice.

ssc85 you haven't ignored me you hypocrite.

Ayesha4 has continually been spreading false info on this company and not a single complaint from you ssc85.

You couldn't make this up.


(NOT short BNN)

(just think all chinese linked companies hould be avoided as the chinese are generally out and out fraudsters or compulsive gamblers)

[highasakite] 06/10/2017 11:16

ayesha4 is a liar and fraud and has been reported to advfn.

[marmar80] 06/10/2017 10:52

You both can post links to support own posts

[highasakite] 06/10/2017 10:39

Punters happy to accept Ayesha4's info sources who have been wrong repeatedly wrong in the past.

MUGS.

[highasakite] 06/10/2017 10:32

Ayesha4 has posted lie after lie about BNN over the months.

Not to be trusted.

My source is from the same source as Ayesha4.


People question my source but never question serial liar Ayesha4's source !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[andy] 06/10/2017 10:29

marmar,

Yet you don't ask Aysha4 the same question!

Why?

[ssc85] 06/10/2017 10:25

Marmar, HAAK is a moronic troll. Ignore him/her/it.

Ayesha thanks for passing on. Happy Friday all.

[marmar80] 06/10/2017 10:22

High, how do you know they never relist? Source od information please.

[newmanontheblock] 06/10/2017 10:16

Thanks Ayesha4.

[and11] 06/10/2017 10:09

Pot calling!!! I would suggest from the last poster...🤡🤡🤡9313;

[highasakite] 06/10/2017 09:53

ayesha4 you are a ramping piece of filth who has no credability at all.

BNN will never relist.

Stop lying you fraudster.

[ayesha4] 06/10/2017 09:10

Im not going to engage the buffoons that frequent this thread. We shall hopefully get an update next week.

[ayesha4] 06/10/2017 09:06

Yes. Should become clearer by end of next week.

[newmanontheblock] 06/10/2017 09:01

Ayesha4. Is that 100% from your contacts in the know?

[ayesha4] 06/10/2017 08:26

We should get an update next week. Qi should be exonerated and Mercer soon after. Q3 business was adversely affected by the allegations but business intact. Board will need strengthening which will take time. Should be re-listed in November some-time.

[nohead] 05/10/2017 07:12

It all depends whether the two man want to step up and really make this work, or just want to wash their hands of the problem.

[andy] 04/10/2017 22:40

newman,

Well with the money intact, unless the contracts were invented, I would hope the company will come back.


Even if there is an issue with the contracts, the money is still there and therefore I would think it will relist personally, and I hope it does for eveyone's sake.

[newmanontheblock] 04/10/2017 20:05

Andy. Let's face it. The share price will plummet if this share re-lists. There is no certainty it will re-list by the way. I am hopeful, but just only hopeful. My only point in today's Comms is that CFO might also be in the wrong, and also remains innocent until proven guilty. Everyone is obviously pointing the finger at Wei and DM for doing something wrong...but nothing is ever as simple as it seems. CFO getting sidelined theory is still up there as a probable cause, just like ghost contracts made up by DM and Wei. US chairman was too new and too distant to instantaneously verify or dismiss claims over that weekend, so ultimately he played the safe card by doing what he did. Anyway, we are all speculating. News will come, but the share may not come back.

[andy] 04/10/2017 19:41

ssc85,

What a load of rubbish!

There was no "trick", just a post typed hastily before my train arrived at the station, that's all!


My theory is reasonably credible, IMO, I don't subscribe to the theory that "he was about to be pushed out so threw some mud", as he resigned anyway! So what's the difference? Either way he lost his job!

And he would surely have been better negotiating a good reference and resign, than slinging mud without substance? I would think it could also be libelous to make false allegations, don't you?

So that's why I see it as far less probable.


I would have expected a prima facie investigation to go ahead BEFORE any suspension was announced, and that seems to have occurred over that weekend! The time it is taking seems a bit long if there is no case whatsoever to answer.


The cash is still there which is of prime importance!


I'll bet you it certainly will drop when it opens, even if they suspended people remain in their positions. The market doesn't like uncertainty, and this share was already falling almost daily before this news.

[ssc85] 04/10/2017 16:42

Andy4 Oct '17 - 15:39 - 7786 of 7787 0 0
newman,

I totally disagree, if he discovered financial wrongdoing, he clearly did the decent thing and disassociated himself from it by resigning, which is clearly the correct course of action.


I understand why you would have preferred it to be kept quiet, but we both know that would not have been the correct course of action, legally or morally.

---

Notice the neat trick Andy has done there, he's gone from:

"'if' he discovered x" to
"I understand why you would have preferred it to be kept quiet",

almost making his theory (and that is all it is, zero evidence or proof) sound like the actual chain of events. A few of us heard that the CFO found out he was due to be replaced by a more competent CFO so threw around accusations out of spite on the way out which the board were obliged to investigate. Of course that is also a theory with zero evidence but no less improbable.

Lets not let the shorters drift their way in here casually changing the narrative so they can drive this down dramatically again when it opens. It almost certainly will drop when it opens up but no reason to suspect its dead in the water without any facts positive or negative.