Fox Marble Share Discussion Threads

[echoridge] 03/5/2022 11:43

Unbelievable. You're sighting a distribution agreement RNS from 6 years ago to support the idea that you're not a muppet?? I have no idea about that 'deal' and the circumstances and regulatory oversight involved, but regardless, do you seriously not understand the difference in significance between entering into and announcing what turns out to be a bad business deal - from 2016 no less - and seeking a full suspension of your shares for what will inevitably be many months due to an RTO with another operating business - in 2021?? Do you really not understand that requesting a long-term share suspension, after maybe the circumstances surrounding bid approaches, are among the most scrutinised by any exchange regulator, let alone AIM, since maintaining market liquidity is pretty much any exchange's prime directive? They mostly don't care?!?!? Why, because you say so? In fact, satisfying AIM that Eco Buildings at least has an operating business substantial enough to make the early look at an RTO with a company of FOX's size credible, would absolutely be a MINIMUM requirement of the NOMAD so that they could credibly face the AIM regulator on that specific subject, in order for a suspension of this type to have any chance of being permitted. I'm starting to think that 'muppet' may have been too generous an assessment of you.

[wolstencroft] 03/5/2022 07:51

More amusing stuff from the past...

Hi Cxxx

I do have several questions about Eboracum and am still looking into them.

My main wonder is why their website is a poor copy of another legitimate company’s who further claim they have no association with Eboracum.
“Dear John, Please accept my apologies for late reply, just to let you know we have no connection with www.eboracum-marble.co.uk. We are based in Southall and we do not have any other branch. Should you wish to visit us please do not hesitate to contact me to make arrangements.
Kindest regards,”





Eboracum are making all sorts of claims about their premises (which is actually an accountants just up the road from where they incorporated), opening times, 15 years of experience, premises established 1902 etc. The website was set up shortly after Eboracum incorporated and the person on the phone claimed to be Eboracum Marble; the email is however, broken. It appears to me that they are making misrepresentations on their website, or of course someone is passing themselves off as Eboracum Marble and therefore misrepresenting on two counts.

My question is: Does this concern you as to the integrity of Eboracum as a customer especially with such a large order?

Cxxx replied:

"John, ...
Your point is well made however we do know that Eboracum is a start up backed by a couple of HNWs.
... l am also aware of some of their customer base one of which again we disclosed ... l am familiar with others of their customers."

Eboracum never declared any income in their companies house filings.

Where were the Nomand and House Brokers and AIM regulators here - you know as well as I do they mostly don't much care.

[wolstencroft] 03/5/2022 07:44

Yes, just like it made sense for Fox to do a deal with Eboracum, set up by a failed bar manager with the administrators from his last failed business chasing him asking where all the money had gone, or Banyan Stone, a company registed in Gibraltar with, er, no assets, for years running they had no assets and I think Fox got away with talking about Eboracum's orders when they were actually a dormant company. Fox announced millions of orders with new businesses that came to nothing.

I asked the Fox's brokers about Eboracum and they replied that Fox had vouched for the Eboracum founder and that was good enough for them! When I asked Chris how he had announced $$$ of deals with Banyan but their company accounts showed minimal assets he said I should ask them.

At least he didn't call me a muppet.

[echoridge] 29/4/2022 22:21

sure sure, and with just 1k in assets. Right. It makes so much sense that FOX would want to reverse in such a business - and AIM and the NOMAD would bless suspending the shares pending a prospectus - just so they get their greedy hands on all that dough. muppet

[wolstencroft] 29/4/2022 09:55

Domain Name: ECO-BUILDINGS.NET
Registry Domain ID: 2682309447_DOMAIN_NET-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.enom.com
Registrar URL:
Updated Date: 2022-03-17T17:42:55Z
Creation Date: 2022-03-17T17:41:18Z

Oh dear

yet another deal with a recently set up company!

[echoridge] 28/4/2022 13:01

hxxps://www.eco-buildings.net/about

[kemche] 28/4/2022 12:17

I presented Fox at a recent hedge fund convention as a pairs trade of Long Fox/Long CHLL which was warmly received by the attendees.

My other successful calls were:
Long BRES
Long BRSD
Long IES
Long GFIN
Long ZED

amongst a host of others. All successfully.

Based on my successes to date the hedge funds association have sent me a message saying 'None wanted. None needed.' Cryptic indeed.

[echoridge] 28/4/2022 11:43

oh my, a grand goes a long way it seems: hxxps://www.eco-buildings.net

[kemche] 27/4/2022 06:57

Barry, Another of your successful calls?

Are you participating in the CHLL fundraising?

[echoridge] 20/4/2022 08:33

Yeah, what do you want, Never-Was?

[danmart2] 20/4/2022 07:41

Who was the ramper who was claiming they could fill the houses with fox’s marble?

[wolstencroft] 20/4/2022 07:37

So this is a new company.

A bit like Banyan, Eboracum etc

Set up recently, no website - edit found a website

[wolstencroft] 20/4/2022 07:33

Ok found them now

ECO Buildings Group Ltd
Company number 13774419

[echoridge] 14/4/2022 15:43

C.R.I.C.K.E.T.S. cowards

[echoridge] 14/4/2022 13:34

Yes. And please see today's HotStockRockets take on the FOX-ECO RTO for why. I have had it forwarded it to me but cannot reprint it here yet, though I'm sure someone will work it out soon and post it. In the meantime, let's just say it makes a mockery of the idiotic debate I've had to have here with the Curators, in particular as it pertains to the most relevant issue of all: the likely ALREADY significant asset and order book size of Eco Buildings rather than the red herring of the £1k offered by the Curators from a poxy page on Companies House. The implications for a significant upside for legacy FOX shareholders should this deal progress, are therefore made clear by the author.

[wolstencroft] 14/4/2022 11:28

Wow a good bit of posting here

All I would like to add is, IMHO, is that the regulators and nomads and brokers have seemingly been completely disintereted in FOX's announcements for years and there is no reason I think to suggest that this is any different. Tens of millions of announced orders, deals with Banyan (set up days prior to making a deal with Fox AFAIK with no offices and hidden directors) and Eboracum (failed director former bar manager being chased by liqiudators of previous company who set up Eboracum days before making deal with Fox who then copied someone else's website to make it their own). It all came to nothing, or almost nothing.

This time is different???

[echoridge] 13/4/2022 07:20

Second day of crickets while effortless ignores the Green Flags posted here. Roll on the Pathfinder

[haroldthegreat] 12/4/2022 11:12

When do we get payment of our claim ? How many millions is it ? I am more interested in reading arns on that !

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 09:46

and fwiw, dealing with one witless message board warrior who is immune to being exposed as a phoney is hard enough, but dealing with the crusty old inanities of a whole clutch of them requires a lot of the right kind of attention. So there's that. Now, back to my central contention. You going to address it or are you going to keep coming back at me with meaningless slurs, like a b*tch?

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 09:41

deflection, glen, deflection. At least try to stay on message.

[glennborthwick] 12/4/2022 09:21

Heavens above you must have been a lonely child to want this much attention.

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 09:15

If you don't want me to continually punch down on you, effortless, then try and answer my central contention. otherwise, go away and read that book ffs. This is no fun for me otherwise

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 09:10

ah heck, I'll start now. Do you really think, when you are hopelessly out of your depth now that you are finally facing someone who actually knows the fault lines of your bullsht, that ad hominem attacks on ME as not knowing what I'm talking about will somehow cover up your own google-level knowledge of markets? Sorry, nah.

[echoridge] 12/4/2022 09:03

relax effortless, you'll get your time in the barrel. Be patient. In the meantime, read that book.