Oxus Gold Share Discussion Threads

[maytrees] 11/11/2015 16:06

Interesting john henry

When in the 1980s the stock market was made more competitive there had to be changes in betting laws to allow shorting which otherwise would have been pure gambling.

One has always been able to buy shares however risky (and there are of course large risks in OXS shares) without gambling laws requiring amendment, because one or usually these days, rather one's broker, receives actual shares.

A bet gives you just a betting slip and even that is not, or at least used not to be, enforceable through the courts.

[john henry] 11/11/2015 16:01

The arbitrators are probably asleep most of the day.

[shinyleather] 11/11/2015 16:01

It's a punt investment.

[john henry] 11/11/2015 16:00

shinyleather, you can hardly call Oxus an investment, Its a Punt pure and simple.

Anyone looking at this as an investment, shouldn't be putting money into the stock market.

Aimho

[maytrees] 11/11/2015 15:56

lol shinyleather but you may prove right!
Though if so why it should then take the arbitrators so long to dismiss the claims is beyond me at least.

[shinyleather] 11/11/2015 15:54

Extremely risky investment, on the verge of madness?

[maytrees] 11/11/2015 15:40

Festario greetings

I'm reserving judgment about that until after the arbitration outcome - having done some reading before buying in.

You may of ccourse prove to be right but shares investing, even in the main market, is open to some or much risk so what one calls it, may be down to perhaps personal definition.

[wallyjumblat] 11/11/2015 15:37

FFS this is like a Monty Pythons Sketch "and then another minute passed".

[festario] 11/11/2015 15:35

Maytrees, make no mistake, this is NOT an 'investment'

[riskier] 11/11/2015 15:32

Wow, now its 'déjà vu' all over again, all over again...

[the stigologist] 11/11/2015 15:02

I'm getting deja vu about people complaining at 2p in Jan/Feb (before the jump to 4-5p) and people complaining at 2.5p in Jul/Aug (before the jump to 4-5p)

PI punters tend to be contra-indicators

[maytrees] 11/11/2015 14:53

Still another tiny top up for me at 3.88p

Difficult to find decent AIM shares to invest in these days possibly because fewer are investing anyway.

EG I don't hold OEX but there seems to be something awry there and a 35%+ share price fall out of the blue. EDIT down 42%+ a couple of minues later!

AT least with OXS one knows what the risks are.

[riskier] 11/11/2015 14:49

It does feel like 'déjà vu' all over again...

[skidaddle] 11/11/2015 14:48

I'm starting to get 2014 deja vu.

[giant steps] 11/11/2015 14:25

apf, force majeure was 18MAR2011, 1699 days ago (4.65ys)

[78steve] 11/11/2015 14:07

apf as long as we don't have to wait another 4 years ;)

[apfindley] 11/11/2015 14:02

Think of the very near future as a proportion of the overall timescale thus far.Considering the duration being around 4 years since force majeure was declared, then 4 months could be the very near future.Relax and wait.

[the stigologist] 11/11/2015 13:44

Chart continues to set up in a constructive manner

[wulber] 11/11/2015 13:39

LETS HOPE RUBY1979 IS REAL AND THE CONVERSATION DID EXIST, WITH NEWS EXPECTED TO ARRIVE ANYWHERE FROM NOW TO EOM NOVEMBER.

[grbaker] 11/11/2015 13:09

P.S. I think it was maybe unwise of RS to write what he did; but, by the same token, he must have had some reason for saying 'in the very near future'.

It is the rest of us who are left searching for a definition of what 'in the very near future' actually means!

It could mean days or a few months in my opinion; and the definition must surely take into consideration the length of time that has so far passed by while we have all awaited the decision.

In other words and for example; if a decision was expected in say a few minutes time, rather than a few months time, based on past time-frames for similar situations, then the definition of 'in the very near future' would be clearly be very different.

It's a flexible statement in terms meaning, definition and interpretation IMHO.

[shinyleather] 11/11/2015 13:07

Everyone appears to have a different interpretation of 'the very near future', for me, it is the rest of this year. For others it has passed. Patience brothers and sisters, patience, everything comes to those who wait.

[maytrees] 11/11/2015 13:04

It's quite possible that he looked at the average time gap between arbitration hearings and decisions and came to the conclusion that as the delay in the OXS case was already more than average, the decision was likely to be imminent.

If the outcome is largely against OXS then the delay is much harder to understand.

If the outcome favours OXS the the delay is in mho likely to be caused by difficulty in calculating the amounts due to be paid to the company and reasoning.