Orchard Gate
04 Nov 2015
not my fault so you lot bought shares in a company which had many red flags and some commentators openly saying the numbers didn't add up or even that it was a fraud but now it turns out to be a fraud ... errr ... that must be somebody else's fault and not yours so you want to sue the auditors or the directors or the newspapers or your next door neighbour. Basically, anyone other than accept your own responsibility for being greedy and making stupid decisions.You're not all Yanks are you?
Ripley94
04 Nov 2015
Re: The Sage N/M
The Millipede
04 Nov 2015
Re: Grant Thornton - Class action "If lawyers are advising me that we have a good case and will take on the cost burden then who am I to argue...?"FFS. This mindset never ends. If Costis says this is a perfectly honest investment with great potential who is anyone to argue? Just invest. How can it go wrong?You are just fodder for other people's agendas. And you won't learn a thing from this. IMVHO.
winningstreak
04 Nov 2015
Re: Grant Thornton - Class action When a Company claims to have large sums on deposit in bank/s thenI would expect the employed outside Accountants to look for end of year Bank Statements in order to verify and complete the annual Accounts.My accountant insists on receiving my end of year Bank Statement.ws
GCCR
04 Nov 2015
Costis Has anyone caught this F0ck3r yet ?
GCCR
04 Nov 2015
Re: Grant Thornton - Class action Just registered there too. Has anyone considered that they may even have been in on this rouse ?
JakNife
04 Nov 2015
Re: Grant Thornton Topalov,My apologies, I wasn't deliberately selectively quoting you. Overall I think that we are probably in the same ballpark, I think that Grant Thornton probably did the normal level of due diligence that was expected of them but that given the deliberate non-disclosure of the connected party relationships then there was probably nothing more that they could do.Costis provided reasonable explanations to many investors, including FORUM who stuck millions in only a few weeks prior to collapse. If it satisfied investors then it's reasonable to assume that it also satisfied the auditors.JaKNife
Orchard Gate
04 Nov 2015
Re: Mike Jeremy Funny you should mention Vyke, spankeroo. That was another huge fraud although they got away with it by going bust before it was fully uncovered.But I seem to recall you were a big bull and not interested to listen to those who suggested all was not well with Vyke. Any of these comments sound familiar?“One to tuck away … Price targets seem to range from 200-500p.” “Buy. I think … customer sign ups ahead of expectations and will go into profit by the end of the year. …. cash should pour out of this business nxt yr. Keep the faith.”“Profits will come News flow should be v.good”“If you have the cash IMHO you should buy”“£8m of cash, the company always said it would breakeven at EBITDA at the end of the year. It's the bigger picture one needs to focus on …”“from what I have seen and heard Vyke does have something special - … The model is compelling and once Vykeair comes fully on line it will be a market leader.”
gallant02
04 Nov 2015
Re: Grant Thornton - Class action Sharesoc now have more than 200 investors registered to participate in the action against GT and others. If lawyers are advising me that we have a good case and will take on the cost burden then who am I to argue...?
The Millipede
04 Nov 2015
Re: AIM "No amount of research will discover a fraud"Not beyond all doubt, it is true. Probably but for the recent admissions of the now former CEO we would still be unsure about quite what was going on here...... and you can bet your bottom dollar plenty would still be defending the company and attacking Quintessential.But investing is about more than numbers and I would say, while I mention that point, that this is precisely Simon Thompson's weakness. He looks at the accounts and forms a view. For him that is the end of it and he has come a cropper now several times for the same reason IMO. At Polo Resources, for instance, he was constantly saying the stock traded at a discount to NAV so the share was undervalued, without trying to ask himself whether the NAV in their accounts was reasonable in the first place (it was not). Here, and at several Chinese stocks, he saw a large cash balance and low PE but did not think to question the motives of directors and seed investors who, in many cases, were selling out as quickly as they could soon after listing. At several other high profile AIM companies, including this one, the valuations have exceeded all reasonable levels even assuming no fraud..... the risk has pretty much always been to the downside here.You could argue the fraud Globo was hard to spot. I would say: there were enough red flags and plenty of us knew to avoid it. For a long time it was certainly hugely popular and overvalued. Call it instinct or a judgement call if you like but given that, generally, we knew not to invest in ANY of these companies that have either been revealed as frauds or whose share prices have tanked over the past five years or so..... I do not think it can be called luck.
Topalov
04 Nov 2015
Re: Grant Thornton Jaknife,I notice you didn't quote this part of my post:"Off course it is more difficult when Directors have gone to the trouble of falsifying information."I was responding to the Millipede's post - my point being that auditors are not doing their job if they simply accept general ledger balances provided by the company. The question nis whetehr the auditors carried out their duties with proper riguor - it may be that the fraud was done in such a way that it would have been almost impossible for an auditor to pick up. The only way to know if the auditors were negligent is to look at the audit papers. As is now well known there have been many commentators questioning the accounts for some time, so some signs were there.
Gooffy
04 Nov 2015
Re: AIM I did do my own research, note to self look at the directors in more detail first.No amount of research will discover a fraud, several people were tipping it as a buy.Costis will have to live with his actions, I guess he will have upset a lot of people not to mention the 91 people who work for this company.
Go Dink
04 Nov 2015
Re: AIM This is why it's so important to DYOR. There's no harm in reading a different point of view from your own and then judging which side you agree with.
The Millipede
04 Nov 2015
Re: AIM "Even the tipsters get it wrong"Sigh. If the tipsters know more than you do...... then it is safe to assume you are not sat at the dinner table but are a dish on the menu (to paraphrase the former Chairman of my employer).
Gooffy
04 Nov 2015
AIM Best avoided from now on in my view.RRL - BHR - GLOBOWould have been better putting my money on a horse.I guess as word goes round of yet another fraud on AIM then its credibility and purpose will be questioned, making money seems impossible and losing it easy. Even the tipsters get it wrong.
