Eg Solutions Share Discussion Threads

[farsight] 08/7/2005 18:43

It isn't funds, htrocka. It's banks. Banks who are creditors hatch plans, and guess what, they're brokers too. JakNife works for a bank, don't you JakNife.

[htrocka] 08/7/2005 18:21

back to jakNife`s `defence` of Energis... with reference to some of the unsouvery aspects of capitalism, sepcifically hegdefunds with their insider knowledge and their co-external allies who manipulted Energis into administration..and curiously one of the top G8 agenda`s...



from `Business Breakfast` BBC2 July 6th.

At the G8 summit Germany`s Chancelor Schroder is to highlight the problem of unregulated hedgefunds...and uses terms such as `short selling` with `inside information`....and the damage they have caused to German companies...and specifically mentions British Hedge funds.



So JakNife...8 of the top riches members of the world have travelled the ends of the earth to discuss the problem of `the use and knowledge of company debt by various funds`, now tell me you`re squeaky clean...and it dosen`t happen in this country........this is why the dramatic drop in the Energis share price needs to be investigated.Who sold what, when and why?. It amazes me that should a share price rise dramatically...the stock exchange have to be notified....yet if it drop out of the sky, no notice is required. British Energy had bigger debts than Energis ...and the main reason they survived is because hmg clamped down on the funds activity....I`m sure you`ll support such an investigation...and if proven that various parties acted in concert,especially after APAX had offered existing shareholders 5p a share... in that administration had been co-erced as a result of these external factors specifically the actions taken by funds that held both debt and equity stakes in the company..then there is a case to answer.

[finmac] 08/7/2005 17:11

JacNife,
I have long ago written of to experience the Energis affair, but I would like to know why you write on this thread, aparently defending the Energis position whenever anyone attacks the deal done with the banks and bond holders. I have to agree that some of what you say is probably very factual, but I have not once seen any post of yours, which even concedes that there may be some inherent unfairness in the system. I started this thread some 22648 posts ago and am still surprised that it seem to continue unabated, this mustr mean that a lot of people are still convinced that all was not well in Energis. The point I am trying to make is that I who started this thread, post very rarely, while you still take on the mantle of the defender of the faith for Energis, their ex-directors, the banks and the bondholders. Why?
Regards
Finmac

[htrocka] 03/7/2005 08:35

'We will sue the Government for billions'
By Edward Simpkins (Filed: 03/07/2005)


The Government faces a multi-billion pound claim for damages from institutional investors in Railtrack if it loses the case currently being fought against it in the High Court by small shareholders.




Crispin Odey: 'I am considering my position'
One of the UK's most influential fund managers, Crispin Odey, the chief executive of Odey Asset Management, whose investment in Railtrack was wiped out when the company was declared insolvent, has recently consulted lawyers. He will sue if the High Court decides that the Government acted improperly in the way it handled Railtrack's administration.






He said that other fund managers, including Fidelity, Merrill Lynch and UBS, are duty bound to take legal action on behalf of their clients if sufficient evidence emerges.





The Government's defence rests on the claim by Stephen Byers, then the secretary of state for transport, that Robinson told him on July 25 2001 that the company was in serious financial trouble and would not be able to sign a certificate that it was a going concern when it published its results later that year.


The above is from todays Telegraph.



The point of posting being the reference to the last two paragraphs.....this emphasises the point that the FSA `regulations`..break down and are unworkable....with reference to the former of the above two....if the fund managers themselves have acted improperly...how do you sue yourself?...in reality you don`t...you just keep your head down and hope things blow over.....and you get away with it.......£30k against institutions that have made mi££ions out of Energis.....guess which one of these two can now afford the top lawyers in the country?....this is why the Railtrack story fascinates me...the pockets of the small investor against the governmenet and the bottomless reserves of the bank of England.......the Railtrack investor is not at fault , he was advised to `buy`.

[gerry2] 03/7/2005 00:32

germ flusher - 3 Jul'05 - 00:30 - 22645 of 22645 (Filtered)

LOL

Still trying to get my attention ?.
you lowly Maggot

[germ flusher] 03/7/2005 00:30

Post removed by ADVFN

[gerry2] 03/7/2005 00:27

JtK
Have a nice Day .

Regards

Beelzebub
Lord of Maggots
LOL

[germ flusher] 02/7/2005 10:55

Post removed by ADVFN

[gerry2] 02/7/2005 10:36

germ flusher - 2 Jul'05 - 10:23 - 22640 of 22640 (Filtered)

Why is this thick filtered Maggot still posting ?

[germ flusher] 02/7/2005 10:23

Post removed by ADVFN

[htrocka] 02/7/2005 09:47

Just before the collapse, thirteen broking houses all rated and recommended Energis a `Strong Buy` some with target prices up to £8.00.....all who consequently went on to short the stock without ever recommending a `SELL`...I think this cover braking all of the above `objectives`.....unless of course these objectives are for institutional use only.....The FSA gives the illusion that it protects the public but hindsight indicates that it was actually created to protect the `old boy network`....the fact that no one recommeded selling the stock after recommeding the public to buy it...this alone warrants investigation.A lot of people look to these brokers for advice....and they took it......and now they, like yourself, tell us it`s our fault?. The only conclusion I can reach with this scenario is that the Stock Exchange is full of thieves,crooks and a cover for dishonesty.....the `big boys` are beyond the law....because thay are the law.

[jesh] 01/7/2005 21:00

He's had hundreds of usernames over the years. Here are just those he registered since MAY 1st 2005.
=====================================

bomfins, qopi, Jopi, fopi, Sopi, Galloway Kicking Ass, gallowaybaby, smiling george, smiling galloway, 52ndstate, nevado. ( 11 )
---------------------------------------------------

June '05... nevado, arizono, v1ctory4me, DeMENTALri, nightmare4u, wellahead, thy555, navada, newevening, summerevening, germ flusher, ( 11 )

July '05... germ flusher,
---------------------------------

Advfn have the answer to him at last.. They just deny his victims access to the BB's

[germ flusher] 01/7/2005 20:56

Post removed by ADVFN

[gerry2] 01/7/2005 20:35

JakNife

Define the FSA and its reason to exist ?

Even Australian Rules football has rules ?
I think .

[germ flusher] 01/7/2005 20:23

Post removed by ADVFN

[gerry2] 01/7/2005 20:18

germ flusher - 1 Jul'05 - 20:16 - 22631 of 22631 (Filtered)


Get lost you maggot .

[germ flusher] 01/7/2005 20:16

Post removed by ADVFN

[gerry2] 01/7/2005 20:11

I don't know really ?
Not having a reptilian cold blood constitution like you .
Us humans have a strange sense of fair play .
The Nanny state Suspension would have protected the company its then present shareholders and bondholders until its situation has been evaluated .
Instead ? it was left to Your perception of fair play?
Looters .
but Hell ?
It really is a hyena Eat hyena out there ?
The World deserves IT .