Triad Share Discussion Threads

[pride23s] 25/2/2019 13:33

I agree I am still adding I tend to use dividends from other investments to continue buying I am looking to hold very long term anyway.

[brendainvesta] 25/2/2019 13:00

Me too, and at this price I am still adding.

[pride23s] 25/2/2019 09:32

Well I hope so as own around 1% of the shares!!

[brendainvesta] 23/2/2019 15:24

Not long to wait, but the results would have to be unbelievably bad to change the fact that this is an amazing bargain. Nothing like it in the main market, this is not ‘AIM’, it’s probably a once in a lifetime opportunity to grad a chuck of a main market listed company.

[pride23s] 23/2/2019 11:59

I can only comment on fundamentals and not historic troubles..but I still very much like the numbers pe/cash/dividend/earnings. It will be interesting to see what impact the next set of results have.

[brendainvesta] 23/2/2019 09:26

Triad resently published an RNS about a High Court Case - quite basically this was against someone posting incorrect and damaging statements, I have been told that they won the case so her posts here have been removed. This is probably an injunction of some kind, I am no expert but I guess there will be another RNS soon with the results of the case. I can also guess as Equiniti was the main target of a very persistent Twitter attack they asked for her Twitter account to be stopped as it was blocked in December.

Nice PE ratio, anyone like to comment?

[owenski] 19/2/2019 09:09

Interesting that these epic posts have all been deleted, normally the post number remains, have ADVFN been instructed to remove them.

[brendainvesta] 19/2/2019 08:15

Her twitter account and that of her pocket journalist have both been blocked. Her postings here are removed. Do you guys not understand she is damaging our investments with her lies, please open your eyes and get real there is no Government conspiracy. She is a bankrupt. She was taken to the high court by Triad and its directors last week and she lost.
She is damaging the reputation of a main market listed company. The investors in that company want her to stop tweeting and posting rubbish.
At one point she was suing over 60 different people and entities at the same time. This is not normal the strange world she lives in is not the one I live in or that of normal people.
If you know her please request that she takes up any issues she has privately and not in a public forum.
Please let’s put this insane dialogue to bed.

[valhamos] 19/2/2019 07:46

alanadale - thanks for posting.

brendainvesta - rather than getting hysterical with references to "little green men" surely it would be better to try and engage with what is going on rather than trying to shut down debate.

[brendainvesta] 19/2/2019 06:24

Deleted probably due to the fact that they are toxic, incoherent rubbish ramblings about Government conspiracies, denial that she is a bankrupt, little green men etc.
Everyone is aware you are her friend so please stop reposting deleted rubbish, they have been deleted for a reason.

[brendainvesta] 18/2/2019 09:35

Macbeth

I thought we had put this to bed.

There is a name that seems toxic in legal circles (vexatious litigant).

It is a name that also seems toxic if associated to an equity.

This is the situation as far as Joe Public - private investors are concerned.

Please do not reply if you think I am slightly incorrect or if you see little green men or believe there is a Govermment conspiracy or to further define a legal term or even to correct my grammar.
Basically our investment is being damaged by the name that should not be mentioned.

A case between ... and Triad was settled probably because it was cheaper to do so. Long drawn out cases are expensive.
This was seen as a victory by one party and very much bandied about as such.

This party is currently a bankrupt, not insolvent but registered as bankrupt.

Type the surname at this Government site for verification.


Due to this, property was sold and shares were sold to cover debt.

Translations.
Squatters = New legal owners.
Share thief = New legal owners.

Due to recent illegal public posting by ..... Triad took her to the High court and won.
I haven’t been able to get full information on that yet.

However I hope the actual outcome will be that posting by .... will cease.
Us poor suffering investors will no longer have our well thought out Investments damaged when the company in question is doing V. very well.

Now, can we all stop discussing ancient history and little green men.

[netcurtains] 14/2/2019 12:52

Yes I agree, Brendainvesta as IT is cyclical and a good year often follows a rough and ready year. They definitely appear to have won good business.

[brendainvesta] 13/2/2019 22:10

I added few as well today but I believe imho true value is somewhere between £1 and £2, but this may take a couple of years.

[matt123d] 13/2/2019 20:22

Added a few today, looking for a move back to mid 50s.

[brendainvesta] 13/2/2019 17:57

All buys today, hopefully a trend on the start.

[s34icknote] 13/2/2019 17:35

Fundamentals always come through eventually Sicknote

[wiganer] 13/2/2019 15:17

Yes, hopefully the side issue can now be put to one side.

[brendainvesta] 12/2/2019 22:22

Again we are not looking at the company.
Triad is now paying good dividends, has surplus cash in the bank is expanding and actively employing to fill positions. Profits are good and the share price is a bargain. In uncertain times this is where I am putting my surplus cash.
I am waiting for one of my investments to come to fruition,(imminent takeover) then will buy a further (bargain) big chuck of this stock.

[brendainvesta] 12/2/2019 18:37

Danger, I agree with sailing John, a good summary. However I disagree that she was badly treated in 06. That whole issue as far as I am aware was the result of her trying to take control of the profit making side of the company interfereing with the managemen of it in some way. Triad at the time was very much operating as two entities.

Her plan didn’t work but left her out on a limb, unable to back down she went all in and started attacking where she could.

Triad settled the tribunal probably as it was in their interest(cheaper) not because they were in the wrong.

[sailing john] 12/2/2019 11:52

Danger - good summary imo

[dangersimpson2] 12/2/2019 11:48

Although there were clear issues in 2006, where Triad appear not to have acted well towards Ms. Makar over the events back then, and this is reflected in the employment tribunal settlement that the company made, I don't see the relevance of those issues to the company today.

All of the subsequent issues appear to stem from a disagreement over the professional fees of an accountancy firm hired by Ms Makar to support the original employment tribunal. This dispute appears to have resulted in an attempt, rightfully or wrongfully, to make Ms Makar bankrupt to recover those fees and awarded court costs, after an appeal against the award was rejected.

It is these actions that appear to have led to a trustee obtaining shares originally belonging to Ms Makar and selling these in the market. The actions of Triad in this matter merely appear to be reporting the holdings via RNS that they were told, and I assume maybe given some documentary evidence to back these up. Companies RNS holdings all the time, it is a standard practice, doesn't require board approval or detailed checking by the company.

I have some sympathy for Ms Makar given that this sounds a fairly horrible situation to find oneself in, however I don't see the company to be at blame for anything apart from their original behaviour in 2006. All the subsequent events appear to be a disagreement between parties completely independent to the company.

There are some questions to answer, such as how shares that were originally in certificated form were obtained by the trustee, but again this is an issue that has nothing to do with Triad, apart from that they happen to be their shares. I don't see why Triad would want to help the trustee acting on behalf of a court award to an accountancy firm that was hired to act against them, and in a way that would see their shares continuously sold into an illiquid market.

The latest Triad RNS appears to be an attempt to distance themselves from the remaining situation and my guess is that it is either a libel suit or an attempt to get an injunction to prevent them being mentioned in connection with the post-2006 events. If my surmisation is correct, this is completely separate to any other past court case between the parties and will simply be tried on the relevant law for this area.

Triad really haven't helped themselves here though by RNSing the court case and then not giving any further information. This is where I see the biggest failing of the company in recent times. It is no wonder many people simply put this in the too hard investment bucket at the moment. Any resolution of the latest court case simply has to be followed by much better shareholder communication.

Happy to be corrected if anyone has documentary evidence that contradicts what I've surmised.