Fox Marble Share Discussion Threads

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 10:01

'Later tonite'???? 'When you have time'?!?!?!? This is all you do girlfriend. You ARE the curator after all. However, in the end, no matter how much historical missteps you want to re-produce to balm your bruised ego, they won't constitute one molecule of a response to my central argument: Companies over promise and under deliver on orders, etc all day, every day and FOX has a particularly painful history on that. Ergo, we're at 1p. I grant you that completely. This is a suspension around a material corporate transaction, however. The standards of disclosure are firstly, 10 orders of magnitude higher and everything I've written continues to apply while your flaccid effort to counter my contentions with history lessons will likewise continue to be less than meaningless. Oh and stop trying to spin the £400k investment into making the merger a reality as a negative. You're adding 'fool' to 'tool' on your description page.

[effortless cool] 12/4/2022 09:59

echoridge,

It is very clear from your posts that you know nothing of what you are talking about. You ignore verifiable red flags posted here and make up "facts" about the AIM process in a desperate attempt to shore up your argument.

The mere claim that you imagine that you have "owned" anyone here exposes you as a fantasist. There is no point in trying to have a discussion with someone that is not honest with themselves, let alone anyone else, so I will leave you to it for now, until we hear more from FOX.

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 09:51

And to put to bed once and for all the main counter-argument of the Curators: That somehow Fox Marble have actually managed to completely bypass any AIM oversight and then managed to slip past their NOMAD an RTO transaction RNS with an unlisted business that has a total of £1k in assets and no operating business, which resulted in their shares being suspended. I'm sure there are legitimate shareholders who are reading this who don't like my style, but ask yourselves this: To what end would the Company engage in such an effort in the first place, that these guys are implicitly claiming? In the hopes that no one notices and they can have a few months off with the shares suspended? Or that during the few months of suspension they hoped they would have enough time to suddenly create an ECO business that contains sufficient value to absorb Fox's £4.5m market cap? Maybe they would have you believe that because FOX does have a history of over-promising and under-delivering, that Chris Gilbert is just kind of having a laugh at your expense, you know, for the heck of it? Or maybe, just maybe, because they are only here to snark while they mock holders of FOX shares, their counter-argument is nothing but fallacious nonsense created out of their bottomless need to condemn no matter the evidence to the contrary.

[glennborthwick] 12/4/2022 09:49

As you like facts here is on undeniable. Share price 7 years ago 22p. 3 years ago 8p. Today a touch over 1p. Same management. 95 percent share price destruction. But feel free to trust these muppets.

[glennborthwick] 12/4/2022 09:45

Later tonight when I have time I'll trawl back through the rns history looking for times when this outfit have put out statements about orders that actually never end up showing in the results.

[clocktower] 12/4/2022 09:37

Cut and thrust but I guess satisfying to ones ego. Keep it up. :-)

[glennborthwick] 12/4/2022 09:37

After all their order book for marble was frequently massive. Sadly it never turned into actual cash orders item and time again.

[glennborthwick] 12/4/2022 09:36

Do you trust Gilbert and etrur be interesting to see who fronts the 400k. It's a busted flush and won't come back from suspension if they can't raise it.

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 09:23

No, sorry, I'm not done with that latest fatuous response. I'm busy here making the case that yesterday's announcement was an unalloyed positive, what looks like a genuine effort to address Fox's clear weaknesses, get it into a larger group which could prove a captive customer for its output, and thereby improve its financial position and give legacy shareholders a genuine shot to make back some of their losses, if management can pull it off. I explained that because of the rules on RTOs that Eco Building's assets/order book must necessarily be material enough to have the merger qualify as an RTO AND that given the scrutiny such announcements get from the AIM board, even at this early stage, it is HIGHLY likely that Fox's NOMAD must have likewise been extremely demanding in getting comfortable about with ECO's materiality, before ever signing off on the RNS in the first place. So this is a conclusion based on lesser known facts and informed speculation about the balance of probabilities based on years of genuine experience in trading and the capital markets, and not just a career of posting on message boards. And the response from you and your other curators? 'At the end of the day only the price you pay and the price you sell out matters anyway....' So brave

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 09:04

Thanks for that curator. And A rolling stone gathers no moss unless An apple a day keeps the doctor away of course. Keep em coming

[glennborthwick] 12/4/2022 08:45

At the end of the day only the price you pay and the price you sell out matters anyway.

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 08:33

Perhaps I was a bit out of line calling you a troll. Curator is far more apt

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 08:31

If your whole purpose is to act as some kind of professional cynic due to your vast experience as an anonymous message board gadfly, perhaps ADVFN have a hall of fame section where you can spend your time with other board curators who have 'threads older than their briefs', unquestionably the most telling boast I've ever read.

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 08:17

You really don't get it, do you? I could care less if you haven't wiped your bum over that period altogether. I'm not interested in history lessons when they're used to try and diminish or totally ignore current positive news. Oh, and your world-weary, been-there-done-that routine is especially grating. Chill enough for you?

[glennborthwick] 12/4/2022 08:02

Shameless trolls. Do me a favour I've got threads on here older than some of my boxer shorts and that's saying something. Chill out a bit. Let's just see. I remember having similar conversations when the stone alliance thing broke.

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 07:57

And you know what the best way is to identify them? When you counter their phoney expertise with a lengthy, evidence-filled post or 2, instead of recognising they've been owned they either disappear altogether or come back and call you 'touchy'. Sound like anyone you know?

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 07:54

Not really. I'm just allergic to shameless trolls who use a couple of financial terms they've learned over years of trading their penny accounts to try and disguise themselves as 'experts'.

[glennborthwick] 12/4/2022 07:17

Blimey you're touchy. You can decide which one you prefer.

[glennborthwick] 12/4/2022 07:16

Blimey your touchy.

[echoridge] 11/4/2022 22:13

and its 'you're', not 'your'. If it's inevitable that you're going to clog up this board with poisonous nonsense, you could at least attempt to write at a schoolboy level.

[echoridge] 11/4/2022 22:10

your last sentence is less than meaningless, which is kind of par for the course for you I'm learning. I could care less what you think about anything frankly, but especially not some vapid comment about how my money is not your money. duh. Its the manifest ignorance of the rest of your post that unfortunately requires a response. No matter what you and your little chums have convinced yourself of, FOX simply could not have had their shares suspended for a proposed RTO, unless they provided adequate proof at this early stage to satisfy both the relevant AIM officials and their NOMAD of the substance of ECO's business and/or assets. Period. Naive indeed.

[glennborthwick] 11/4/2022 21:59

Christ your naive. Aim policing everything. It's the Wild West of share markets which is probably why I dabble in it. Anyway you invest in what you want it's not my money and I never wish Ill on others.

[echoridge] 11/4/2022 21:38

And finally, writing pretend RNSs for your investment club down the pub doesn't count. In the real world, talk to absolutely any AIM CFO today about whose description is closer to reality and maybe you can stop fantasising and go back to just being a pompous tool.

[echoridge] 11/4/2022 21:33

Oh, and since you now understand a bit better what you almost aggressively ignored, have another look at the conversion price of 6p on the CLN. Since you now understand that the CLN investor must necessarily be inside on the ECO RTO and thus must therefore consider the proposed transaction to be value accretive (ie., he/she probably likes it a lot), maybe you can also start to see where such an insider thinks the RTO might value FOX shares post-merger.