We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Meldex | MDX | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 7.09 | 00:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.09 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 05/9/2024 21:25 by lexuss2 Walrus – I suspect you are as knowledgeable now, as you were in 2009 when you said my prognosis for the company was inaccurate (that it had nothing of value and was effectively bust).Throughout your many past posts there are provable instances of misinformation and (in my view) you are in no small way responsible for many of the losses that some PIs incurred with MDX and then later when you encouraged the take up SLNs in the ‘new’ (but unlisted) company. However, if you genuinely have something meaningful and accurate to say that could assist shareholders in MDX to a partial recovery, then I am positive most that still read this board would welcome your input. Given your past record I am not holding my breath for that meaningful information - but I would love to be proven wrong in this instance. |
Posted at 21/8/2022 12:10 by grahamite2 quazie12, your post set me rummaging around at Companies House.After administration and then liquidation, Meldex International plc was dissolved nearly a decade ago, on 18 October 2013. The statement of affairs showed a total deficiency of £103,476,845. 90% of this was shareholders. The liquidators' final statement of account shows no dividend for any class of creditor, from which it follows there was nothing for the shareholders. |
Posted at 27/10/2020 23:19 by stocktastic Lexuss2, mad mike, nipladThanks for your efforts It is particularly sad that in addition to the fraud by MDX directors, 'the system' has also been such a block Your example of the bod agreeing the company was not performing to expectations, then MDX issuing am update to say otherwise, is just incredible. |
Posted at 23/2/2020 14:55 by babazurie Smiles and best wishes to all BPRG, MDX holders past and present |
Posted at 18/1/2020 13:36 by babazurie Am guessing the energy has long gone from BPRG and MDX threads to chase the crooks.Best let go of and manifest better times. |
Posted at 18/6/2018 22:56 by the bull Lexuss2 - 24 Jun 2017 - 20:30:56 - 5229 of 5319 The Meldex Fraud(Moderated) - MDXNiplad (Nick Powell) was 20 metres from the second bomb that was exploded at Brussels Airport on 22 March 2016. When I visited him in hospital in Leuven he told me he actually saw the whites of the bombers eyes before the bomb was detonated; knew exactly what was about to happen; but couldn't get out of the way fast enough. It was nothing short of a miracle that he survived the initial explosion and nothing short of superlative, extremely professional and very compassionate medical care that got him to hospital before he died from his injuries. Even so he spent many months in Belgium, enduring multiple operations and many surgical procedures. Like me, he now has a completely different perspective on what is, and what is not, important in life. Like me, he is also realistic in his belief in what more can be achieved without substantive funding. That funding was asked for over a year ago on this board and other than one shareholder who did offer financial support, it was met with a resounding silence. I have moved on, but if there is anyone out there who is prepared to (substantially) fund further action, then I will hand over all files and evidence to that person, once satisfied he/her is completely genuine. I apologise for no heads on the platter - it was not for a lack of effort. DC Lexuss2 - 20 Dec 2015 - 21:08:13 - 4767 of 5319 The Meldex Fraud(Moderated) - MDX I have received a number of emails asking if I could give some sort of progress report as to ‘ Firstly, I cannot over emphasise how much the road has been littered to obstruct our passage - and the very people charged to protect investorâ̈́ It is my firm conviction the organisations with official legal power to make decisions and force people to obey the laws of the market, failed to do this in respect of Meldex and its shareholders. That failure started in late 2007 and was compounded over a period of years, so much so that any possibility of VOLUNTARY retrospective action occurring after such a lapse of time would be nothing short of a miracle. Voluntary retrospective action would only serve to expose the substantial inadequacies of the relevant authorities and those persons charged with their conduct - and turkeys don†For me, the most revealing aspect has been the arrogance (bordering on contempt) shown by one particular public authority (POTAM) to private investors who were merely seeking simple answers to simple questions. Those investors lodged over 50 specific complaints about the conduct of Meldex, its officers and others connected to it. Those complaints were over and above any other complaints they had made about a concert party and a breach of Rule 9 of the Code and clear evidence was provided to demonstrate that a dozen or more other rules of the Code had been likely breached during the periods POTAM was responsible for policing MDX. Taken in isolation some of those complaints were relatively minor and only deserving of a ‘ The following is an example of one of those complaints: Complaint 3.4.6.4 On 2 January 2008 MDX†Five months later the directors held a meeting to discuss the 2007 results and current trading position, prior to any statement being released to the market. The meeting was held on 14 May 2008 and the minutes of that meeting clearly state: “ One day after that meeting (15 May 2008) the directors released the 2007 preliminary results by RNS. That RNS also commented on current trading and said: “ Prior to the 15 May 2008 announcement, the only expectations released to the market were those released on 2 January 2008 by the company†The minutes of the directorsâS The 15 May statement appears to have been disseminated in a manner designed to deceive and to create or maintain a false market in MDX securities (Contrary to Principle 4 of the Code and Article 3.1 of Directive 2004/25/EC) The above complaint appeared quite straightforward - independent evidence (board minutes) was available to prove the directors agreed trading was well below expectations and an independent RNS was available to show the directors issued a trading update deliberately couched in a manner to convey the opposite. As a consequence a false market had to have been created in the shares of Meldex; and the creation of a false market is considered a very severe breach of the Code Despite numerous communications to POTAM the Panelâ€& Having been repeatedly met by an effective wall of silence, we eventually determined to appeal POTAMâ€& In the first instance our appeal was made through the office of Sir Gordon Langley, the Chairman of the Panelâ€& We then appealed his decision with the Panelâ€& As matters currently stand; 1 POTAM (a public authority) does not need to reply to anyone who makes a complaint to it about the actions of another person or company. 2. POTAM (a public authority) does not need to substantiate the scope, or quality, or quantity, of any investigation into a complaint made to it. 3. POTAM (a public authority) cannot be freely held to account by any member of the public it is supposed to serve. 4. No right whatsoever exists to any member of the public, either statutorily or in common law, that empowers them to ordinarily challenge ANYTHING done (or not done) by POTAMâ€& (I believe the above also applies to the FCA) We have now spent countless hours on this matter and have submitted in excess of a thousand pages of evidence/written argument to the authorities. Although we have tried to limit our expenditure we have also still collectively spent many thousands of pounds. The road we are now able to travel without incurring substantial expense is pretty much ended. As matters stand there exists no current legislation to force POTAM to answer our question(s) and all reasonable avenues to persuade them to do so have been exhausted. We could continue to write to MPs or even demonstrate on the steps of Paternoster Square, but I believe neither would achieve anything worthwhile. The only positive avenue that remains is to petition for a judicial review of the Panelâ€& However, to adopt such a strategy to a conclusion is expensive. The Panel, not being short of funds, could/would employ the very best litigants to fight our petition and defend their corner. We do not have that luxury and would need to raise a minimum of £100,00 I suspect the appetite for funding such an operation is no longer out there but, just in case it is, I would invite any one who is willing to financially support a serious legal challenge to indicate the level of that support by emailing me on lexuss222@hotmail.co To demonstrate my own commitment I am prepared to contribute £10,000 to the fund. If sufficient support is forthcoming it would be my intention to form a private limited company to move this forward, membership of which would be via ownership of one or more of its shares priced at (say) £500 each. The company would pay no salaries to any of its officers, who must all agree to work pro bona and the formation of the company would be subject to a minimum subscription to 200 of its shares. All funds raised will be used solely for the purpose of petitioning for judicial review and then for legal charges that are incurred to present our case, should such a review be granted. A serious legal challenge is now the only option and if there is insufficient financial support forthcoming to support one, I have to regrettably say that after seven years I have come to the end of my Meldex road. Finally, I would like to place on record my indebtedness to Mike Martin (Mad Mike) and Nick Powell (Niplad), both of whom have spent their own money and sacrificed many hours in pursuing matters with me. A very Happy Christmas to all innocent Meldex shareholders. |
Posted at 22/12/2017 17:20 by bargainbob Starting to wonder if the MDx hitman have been out on force . The other threads characters are all missing in action . |
Posted at 08/11/2017 15:35 by saul goodman AVATAR333 - 23 Oct 2017 - 14:38:09 - 93209 of 93467 Meldex 2010 - could this be it? - MDXI note our Dutch friend Mr Koeman has been sacked. Mr Bilic next, I imagine. |
Posted at 18/10/2017 14:51 by avatar333 AVATAR333 - 04 Aug 2015 - 10:48:09 - 78661 of 93174Meldex 2010 - could this be it? - MDX You would've been proud of me the other day, grahamite2. An avatar posting from Kuwait reported that it was 47 degrees there; I suggested to him that he might want to put a pullover on. |
Posted at 12/10/2017 14:48 by saul goodman Man Overbored - 05 Apr 2013 - 13:15:49 - 62357 of 93064 Meldex 2010 - could this be it? - MDXI note that there was a very timely runner in the 3:31 (cartoon) horse race at New Forrest Park yesterday: Levenshulme Pursuit. No idea how it did. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
