Oxus Gold Share Discussion Threads

[wulber] 24/11/2015 08:56

Good top up opportunity!

[maytrees] 24/11/2015 08:54

Sudden fall in share price - not been this low for a while - mms nervous - outcome soon perhaps?

[kcowe] 24/11/2015 08:52

The very near future was made up so the cln holders could de risk ... into the volume the word "very" supplied.

[marmar80] 24/11/2015 08:52

Interesting bid/ask action

[jaf1948] 24/11/2015 08:48

GS,

You would have much better credibility IMO if you just admitted that RS was wrong about the 'very near future' just as he was wrong about 'the end of 2014'. You don't have to a be a cheerleader all the time.

[maytrees] 24/11/2015 08:44

Good morning GS and all
Patience is a virtue but it's not an easy one to learn as this BB may illustrate from time to time.

[giant steps] 24/11/2015 08:43

D4, we are 55 days into the very near future,
on this basis one may speculate news imminent.

[giant steps] 24/11/2015 08:39

Good morning mm80.

If the market is going to walk OXS north it
needs to ensure weak hands have departed imo.

[dumbo4] 24/11/2015 08:39

I assume that RS's now famous'in the very near future' was advised or at least consulted by CC. As the hearings all ended in May 2014, what input would the lawyers on either side have after this date, so would they know that the result will be'in the very near future' ?

[marmar80] 24/11/2015 08:36

Yeap. Think same as you GS. Morning All.

[blueblood] 24/11/2015 08:35

Looks like the very near future comment was as accurate as the end of 2014! Nomad should not have signed that off without some hard evidence imo.

[giant steps] 24/11/2015 08:33

Looks like market is trying a low-volume flush to trip longs

[loverat] 24/11/2015 07:01

Papillion

Just for your benefit and to save you the effort of writing war and peace next time I post something a little light hearted, in future shall I put in bold letters above that it is to be intended as such?

[tro1l] 24/11/2015 00:08

You asking the lawyer Loverat for a legal opinion, lol? Ask him for the name of his chambers or his SRA number first... lolololol

[ronconomics] 23/11/2015 22:52

Phew. That's a relief. But he is curious so ...

The second paragraph of the P S is incorrect. There is no mention of compensation from the govt or quantum. Thd new purchaser just wanted an affordable home.

Suddenly thd govt announces compensation and invites claimants to get in touch. It's not just 10k for every homeowner in the village. You have to have owned the property at the time the railway was announced/built. Ownership today is not the issue as compensation is not paid as a windfall to today's residents.

Filter anyone? Is there a way to filter alerts so I dont get an email except when certain people post?
P.S. I've now filtered myself and suggest you do the same.

[papillon] 23/11/2015 21:52

The answer to your complaint is very logical and rational, Loverat. Don't read this thread. If you filter Giant Steps this thread disappears from view. I've filtered bezant shareholders and temmujin so their OXS threads (in temmujins case countless threads!) have disappeared from my view. I suggest you and others fed up with suffering the posts and charts of the likes of GS and The Stig filter them so your suffering ends.

PS. Actually ronconomics argument is completely illogical. If you are a small shareholder in OXS then you are part owner of OXS, albeit in a very, very, small way. Those "past shareholders" who sell their OXS shares do so with the full knowledge of the impending arbitration verdict as do those who buy the shares. It's no different to if a group of investors buy a house which is subsequently threatened with possible compulsory purchase for a proposed development project and who then sell that house to buyers who know about that compulsory purchase threat. Now whether or not that development project and hence compulsory purchase proceeds will affect the subsequent value of that house. However because the sellers and buyers were in full possession of the possible compulsory purchase knowledge the sellers forfeited any rights to the house when they sold.

[loverat] 23/11/2015 20:57

Actually the argument it is not as illogical as you say.

Some folks have had to suffer reading the posts and charts here for years. Surely these people deserve a bonus?

[papillon] 23/11/2015 19:32

ronconomics
23 Nov'15 - 17:20 - 28742 of 28747 0 0


Is there an argument that says why should current shareholders be compensated if they have only just bought shares. Past shareholders were the ones that lost value when they sold. Just asking?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

LOL. Say OXS lose the arbitration verdict and OXS shares become almost valueless? By your argument do those "past shareholders" have to compensate those who have only just bought the shares? LOL. Your argument is completely illogical. Those "past shareholders", for whatever reason, were not prepared to take the risk of holding OXS shares until the arbitration verdict is announced. Instead they transferred that risk (and ownership of their shares) to others by selling.

As an analogy, by your argument, somebody who sold their house in London when the housing market was flat and interest rates were much higher than now should receive compensation from the person who bought their house now that interest rates are very low and there is a housing market bubble in London because that house is now much more valuable. Completely illogical I'm afraid.

[ronconomics] 23/11/2015 19:19

Kun
Interesting the glasses you viewed my post through.
I've only been in oxus in recent weeks. The reasons you set out fibbers most bases. So my post does not reflect a chip.

Was can innocent question since arbritation seems to be about confiscated assets value and opportunity loss ie compensation. Appreciate I may be thd beneficiary of the event.
Maybe you snapped at others as I can understand it if this issue has come up before and z hierarchy formed zmong the old guard and newbies but that's z function of cliques on message boards not investment or court procedures.

[loverat] 23/11/2015 18:46

kun aguero1

I guess you can understand it in a way. Especially when Stig bought here last Christmas and has a huge chip on his shoulder about shorter term investors/traders.