Cloudified Share Discussion Threads

[jamie414] 11/4/2019 23:20

That's exactly what they did.

[jamesss1] 11/4/2019 21:14

Every cloud...this board will go with Nico the boring scumbag will go too.Andy, dont moderate anymore boards as you haven't a clue how to mate.

[jack1236] 11/4/2019 12:45

JNBRW

Agree. ICSID is self-serving; I bet they all send each other 'Thank you notes'.

[nico115] 11/4/2019 12:21

Problem is Stephen won't admit he's wrong until RNS saying "end of road" and even then he will say some one will finance us with 10m bucks for 1pct of the Company!!Only me and Jamie knew Stephen wrote such rubbish but it made all the fools here feel so positive about their investments I did think this was a good punt ..but a punt was all it was

[nico115] 11/4/2019 12:18

More fool us for believing Stephens BSHe was basically a fraud puffing the shares so he could sellDid he really believe in 10 pounds settlement ??!! Lol

[jnbrw] 11/4/2019 09:53

Jack - and more justice from an a level law student

[jack1236] 11/4/2019 09:02

I did caution about the constant talk of the price achieved via Award; also that fraud is a viable defense in the ICSID world; they have tunnel vision, they see the mention of fraud then the State / ROI gets the benefit of doubt. Even if the state were 100% involved. The ICSID is akin to any Ombudsman you can think of; they resolve matters informally; the Rules went out of the window in this case. There is no reason why Churchill should be bound by anything that the ICSID has decided. Churchill would have got a more meaningful and honest decision from one man and his dog at your local pub.

[bobic] 11/4/2019 09:01

It's the corrupt ICSID led us to defeat.CC needs to prove ICSID benefitted from Roi.

[wulber] 11/4/2019 08:50

Chaps, we will learn our fate soon.Fingers crossed for the fight on!

[andy] 11/4/2019 08:33

cool,

existing holders had no choice, and those with a large holding were prudent to average down, as it cost so little to do so, and significantly lowered their average cost.


But new people being drawn in with promises of £10 per share at the end of the rainbow were simply punters looking for easy money without considering the last time they saw an easy 500 bagger.

[cool hand kev] 11/4/2019 08:25

More fool us for believing it :-(

[andy] 11/4/2019 08:10

jamie,


Indeed, billions of dollars and "£10 per share" were never realistic, I thought a few hundred million dollars, or a return of CHL's expenditure to date on the project were possible, but certainly not probable.


Sadly some people get carried away, and we get "slam dunk" type posts that drew in some unwary punters for a quick 500 bagger!

[jamie414] 11/4/2019 03:01

Don't you feel embarrassed by the absolute drivel you have written for over 3 years?I'd be ashamed of myself if I were you.

[jnbrw] 10/4/2019 16:18

If the land is worth 10m we should have sold it before the verdict and divided up the proceeds with a dividend of 6p per share ;)

[cool hand kev] 10/4/2019 13:21

I thought that the company's market cap was only about 3.4 million?

[jamie414] 09/4/2019 23:02

Derek has had a bad month, not only is he suffering loss here he put his life savings into Debenhams lol

[neo26] 09/4/2019 21:46

That is the most shocking part, Putra registered the document in the registry department, it wasnt ridlatama but Putra.So who committed the bigger crime..If the fraud did occur like roi say.....

[jack1236] 09/4/2019 18:04

JNBRW

As soon as the ROI introduced fraud it became a viable defence; everything else goes out of the window. The fact that Noor knew about the forgeries a long, long time ago; yet revoked the licences for breach of forestry regulations tells me that he is involved, up to his neck.

Further Putra's involvement means there is State Responsibility; the Ad Hoc Committee stating that he only played a small part is just 'beyond belief'.

[jnbrw] 09/4/2019 18:00

And again with the annulment fiasco.

String us along giving us the semblance of a fair and unbiased hearing but really just a sham.

As evidenced by the fact they completely failed to meaningfully address ANY of our 17 factual grievances about undisputable failings by the original panel e.g.Struck out evidence being used, failure to allow us a fair chance to respond to new suddenly introduced evidence,and MANY examples of UNJUST and PREJUDICIAL failings in process.

Blatant and rudimentary failings in a fair system of justice.

[jnbrw] 09/4/2019 17:49

With a longer perspective and hindsight,I believe that roi and icsid have been colluding all along.


We took our grievances to icsid when roi accused us of forestry breaches and revoked our licences .

18 months later after much scheming and shuttle missions between icsid and the indos and a few high profile appointments parachuted to and from the world bank to roi cabinet ( and vice versa ) the plan was hatched to string us along giving the semblance and feel of an open a fair process but was really one that was already planned meticulously.

It was executed meticulously too, with the bifurcation mid way - and culminating with the minotte ambush..

All planned, manipulated and executed to perfection. Roi and icsid in cahoots, and each shock twist and turn catching chl off guard ( and trapping us) really all planned and designed months and years before.

Each the perfect masterstroke to confuse, disrupt, derail, weaken and ultimately bankrupt the company.

[jamesss1] 09/4/2019 11:16

Icsid and ROI are in bed together and churchill will be shafted unless another ruling body is employed to give a fair judgement on this mess, if that is not allowed then churchill is dead.