Jupiter Us Smaller Compa... Share Discussion Threads

[tundeolajide] 27/4/2010 21:17

Mike

Thought i remind you that some got ex-gratia payment, travelling expenses, employed for helping JAG. Whilst other provided their services for free.

Over and out before the thread weekend/after hour visitor clock me online.

[abarclayman] 23/4/2010 12:19

TundeOljide
I don't doubt they'd give their honest opinion. It doesn't mean they're right nor does it answer my question. If it was so obviously flawed, why didn't the solicitors (can't remember their name) Mr Hardy supposedly went to (when he was under the spotlight about dodgy deals with Mr Lawley and cash payments to him) do anything?

AB

[tippyex] 23/4/2010 08:37

Exactly Tunde.
To best of my understanding there's loads of still very angry folks who believe they were stung back in 2002. However, I suspect the fact that the average invested in that flawed fund raising was in the £hundreds, and investors have long written off their investment as not worth arguing about after so long.

They might have a point.

EDIT.....and on the point of shareholders being shafted & misled with that flawed fundraising......am pretty sure solicitors Messrs Carter Ruck were of a similar view.

[tundeolajide] 22/4/2010 22:37

The interchange of poster worth mentioning. Seems Mike is having a break.

ABarclayman

re: "I've not ever seen any proof of the so called 'flawed fund raising'"
ASK ALL THE CVA CONTRIBUTORS THAT LOST MONEY? YOU WILL GET AN HONEST ANSWERS

[tippyex] 22/4/2010 14:02

If I knew then what I know now then I'd certainly have never donated a single penny to the fund raising. I was clearly misled, as per examples I've given time & again on here.

I'm pretty sure if shareholders knew then what they know now (& should have been told at the time) they would never have invested in that flawed prospectus. Who specifically assessed the "in excess of £30 million" claim as "actually identified by solicitors"?

I appreciate you claim not to be a shareholder - but if you don't believe me about bona fide shareholders feeling shafted & misled - just read back to some posters on here like Sansofe, Infamous Academy, mekapun, joshro, totters, adie, moneybelt, wooden5, PeakK9, wonderlust, RHM, Ianmar, golde, rally, TundeOlajide, Katsuman, peteh1, trout, supreme, snaffleclamp, romanrory and many others I've forgotten through the mist of time.

Contrary to your convenient belief I'm no massive fan of Hardy's (you'd have to look long & hard to see such support from me) - but at least he has provided hard evidence that we were misled and JAG was one rotten apple of an organisation.

You keep on banging on about Hardy and what he received from Lawley. I honestly don't know the answer to that. FWIW - I have been lead to believe for some considerable time now that Hardy's view on Lawley is similar to mine on Jones. But of course, you'd only see that as yet another convenient smoke screen, eh?

[abarclayman] 22/4/2010 13:37

TippyEx I've not ever seen any proof of the so called 'flawed fund raising'. Plenty of companies fail over time, just look at Mark Hardy's very long list of liquidated and struck off companies posted by Gartshore a while ago! Which didn't make poor Gartshore popular as you well know!

If you were honest, you'd admit you only hung onto Mark Hardy's coat tails after you were originally against him but then he learnt what you were after and he saw how to capitalise on that. But where has it got you both?

AB

P.S Since seen your new edit.

[tippyex] 22/4/2010 11:51

What it's always come down to is shareholders were misled & shafted out of their money by investing and/or donating to those flawed fundraising exercises.


End of.

EDIT.....anyway, I've always said that if there's any evidence of Hardy (or anyone else for that matter) doing anything illegal........then prosecute.
Absolutely no skin off my nose.

[abarclayman] 22/4/2010 11:17

This is what its come down to then, long repetitive posts by TippyEx trying to convince us he wasn't involved in Mark Hardy's campaign to muddy the waters.

I'm tempted to post LOL but don't want to get a court summons!

Does anyone know yet how much in total Mr Hardy and his pals got paid by David Lawley? I see from Indigo's website the Jellies has been very successful, by that they must mean multi million income.

AB

[tundeolajide] 21/4/2010 21:02

Mike

Re: ".....to help jag" Fact: Majority of those that helped JAG got paid in the end.

According to one individual at a cheaper rate..

[gartshore] 21/4/2010 18:06

Mike he is lost without Hardy , hese not a good judge of charector remember when he thought Downs was a great guy how we would all be able to sleep at night we where in safe hands rotflmao @ kiddoman .

[mikepstevens] 20/4/2010 20:44

...is the trainee hypocrite trying to sail the seas (in his dingy)...losing at golf (crazy golf)..checking his lock ups for £10 a week rent...or been sent to bed for telling porkies?....time will tell :)

[tundeolajide] 17/4/2010 13:14

Detail reporting by the Times (Link below).

An interesting remark by the Judge "Investors received the promised returns, but only by you using money received from new investors to pay out old investors," the judge said. "It was a Ponzi scheme, a dishonest enterprise from the beginning."

[tundeolajide] 16/4/2010 22:43

The long arm of the law ....................... See link below.