Orchard Gate
14 May 2015
comment I should have said that last was taken from the Share Prophets blog (but with me tidying up the spelling which is pretty bad!).
Orchard Gate
14 May 2015
In November of 2014 the Qualifying Executives in the Nomad team at Daniel Stewart, led by China fraud specialist Mr Paul Shackleton all quit and it was forced to tell those AIM Casino companies it represented that they needed a new Nomad or would be slung off AIM. I can now reveal that the London Stock Exchange then secretly scre*** ordinary investors in order to avoid its own humiliation.The LSE was aware that some of the companies Daniel Stewart had floated were not investment grade material suitable even for the casino while at least one (Naibu) but possibly more were outright frauds. November 2014 it was an open secret in the Square Mile that Naibu stunk.However it did find a Nomad to take it on as did all bar a couple of the Daniel Stewart clients. We had all assumed that the new Nomad for Naibu, ZAI Corporate Finance, had signed a form saying that it had undertaken due diligence on Naibu and that it was kosher. Given that Naibu's CEO Houyan Lin was in prison at the time and that its purported cash pile just does not exist we had suggested that ZAI is not fit for purpose as a Nomad.We stand by that view but in the case of Naibu we would like to apologise to ZAI. For whilst investors in Naibu thought that it was kosher because to take it on, a new Nomad must surely have checked it out, the reality is that there was no due diligence done by ZAI or indeed by any Nomad taking on a Daniel Stewart client because the LSE (AIM Regulation) arranged secret waivers.We have been passed copies of special forms Nomads were given when taking on the Daniel Stewart client base where they can sign off on taking on the client stating that they have done no due diligence at all. Instead they simply had to undertake to do DD within two months and if that failed they could then resign. The Nomads were all reminded by the LSE that they were operating under a strict code of confidentiality with the implied message that if a Nomad blabbed it could then face disciplinary action.The net effect of this cover up is that anyone who bought share in Naibu after 12 December when ZAI was appointed should now sue the LSE for their entire loss - the stock was suspended on January 9 as the NEDS smelled a rat and will not return. They can justifiably claim that they bought thinking a new Nomad had done DD but that was not the case because of a secret scheme organised by the London Stock Exchange.This scheme was reckless in the extreme because there could have been other frauds which folks could have bought into thanks to the LSE cover-up - I still believe China Chaintek is a total Norfolk. And you may well ask whether anyone else would have taken on Rangers FC ( subsequently suspended) had this waiver not been applied?So why was the LSE happy for private investors to get scre***in this way? To spare the blushes of Daniel Stewart by not having a raft of the sh*** it floated deemed "not fit for purpose" by its peers? I doubt it. The reason is China. A couple of Asian/Chinese PLCs saw their AIM Casino careers die as Daniel Stewart lost its Nomad license. They were just too hot to handle, too close to being insolvent. But had Nomads had to to a full "new client DD" report on Naibu and others there could have been a mini cull of the AIM China plays which could well have set alarm bells ringing at Allenby (nomad to the fraud Camkids) and Cairn (nomad to the fraud Jiasen) and elsewhere. A mini bloodbath of China AIM frauds would have been FT front page. Instead under the LSE secret scheme the bad news got dribbled out.That is less humiliating for the LSE, which insists there is no problem with China fraud on the casino and indeed is keen to get other Chinese companies listing on the casino. And if - as was the case with Naibu - the LSE's secret cover up caused private investors to lose their entire investment having bought shares they thought were the subject of DD, well so what? The LSE clearly thinks that private investors, the l
1private
13 May 2015
looking at the time line that was a buy 2.3m must have paid a premium to the market
1private
13 May 2015
That 1526 sale was 1.2206p
1private
13 May 2015
sorry that was my sell, however bought back in when it started to go up even more expected it to drop, i also got done with that sell and had to go to the broker should have been a sell at 1.35. bought back in at 1.29 i sold 500k at a decent profit so am still way up
1private
13 May 2015
Bought 1m has not come up yet
1private
13 May 2015
looks like RT is buying
1private
13 May 2015
now 36.1%up on very little volume.
1private
13 May 2015
now 27.5%
1private
13 May 2015
i Can't believe how quiet this bb is with what seems to be happening
1private
13 May 2015
now up 25% and on no volume something happening in the background here
1private
13 May 2015
DAN now up 19%
1private
13 May 2015
Ms know something we don't i recon, moving up on very little volume, does anyone know if RT has got his FCA approval or not.
Orchard Gate
13 May 2015
Re: RNS Fatty Cornish A legend in his own lunchtime. Boozy lunchtime. Nomad to the unacceptable faces of capitalism.See Share Prophets blog for more details. lots more and none of it pretty.
1private
13 May 2015
A bit more buying in here and this could move up rapidly from here. its moving on very little volume mabe some news coming up.
