blouson blouse
14 May 2018
Re: the long shadow killermanStill you refuse to admit you have suffered big losses in this stock and are holding a losing long position- apparently having done so for years.Given a chance to put your money where your mouth is with a bet you show no interest in doing so.I'm not interested in playing games whilst you come up with reasons to wriggle out of taking the bet. Clearly you are happy with the results of your investing approach, despite your losses. Only a fool keeps doing what doesn't work expecting a different outcome. But if that makes you happy so be it- trading and investing is a zero sum game- for some to make money others need to lose it.After the weekend press it seems even more likely that before too long PMG will be issuing a statement that it is incurring costs arsing from it's former fraudulent director's antics. At that point you can stick your head even further in the sand. My guess is by next Summer.
callsignzulu
14 May 2018
Re: Scott Platform Kid : I do detect you relenting I your choice of words......Ha. Ha. Ha Cross was always going to prove you wrong.....Lowlander up for grabs 30th licensing round. Is it in the bag for Parkmead ?
wikkid22
14 May 2018
Re: Scott Platform Same old post that you were saying in 2012. Buy in low while it’s just £3 it will be £5 soon. Even if you’re right this time it’s 10 years out from your earlier posts. Uh oh
callsignzulu
14 May 2018
Re: Scott Platform Scott platform appears to be Parkmeads cash cow.......buy in when the price is low....£5 in three years.....FEED news before the end of Month !
killermanjarrow
14 May 2018
Re: the long shadow >If you think it's a million to 1 shot let me put £5000 on it with you at odds of only 20-1. hahaha. Please explain the logistics of how this bet could ever be taken? If you're prepared to lose £5K then open up a short and post your price?
blouson blouse
13 May 2018
Re: the long shadow Killerman I didn't ignore your points, which are incorrect, but acknowledge, as you also do, that it is pointless continuing this discussion. You clearly aren't interested in facts and prefer to rely on your opinion regardless of how little research you have done into the underlying issues. I suspect that approach is correlated to your financial losses on this stock.It would have taken some time to address the inaccuracies in your points. Conversely it would've taken you seconds to answer my very simple and direct question of whether you are in profit or loss on this stock. So to criticise others for not addressing points whilst refusing to answer a simple direct question is hypocritical and revealing.Clear evidence of Confirmation Bias. If you think it's a million to 1 shot let me put £5000 on it with you at odds of only 20-1. And the cover up of the fraud that PMG was at the centre of is the lead financial story in the Mail on Sunday today - dominating the front page of its financial section.Hardly the history and irrelevance that some wish to believ
killermanjarrow
11 May 2018
Re: the long shadow BlouseI note you ignored all of my points where I'd pulled you up.This is getting v boring. Let's just agree to disagree.You think it's 50/50 that PMG get pulled into the Lloyds issues. I think it's 1 in a million.If you haven't lost money here and you aren't short then it doesn't make sense as to why you're investing so much time on this board.Good luck everyone who's invested here.
blouson blouse
11 May 2018
Re: Blousen callsignzulu- in the last 48 hours you have called my posts "irrelevant waffle" & "history". If only you actually were interested in news related to companies you invested in you may not lose so much.For anyone interested in understanding how current the fraudulent events that centred around PMG's former director David Mills and PMG's subsidiary Quayside are; and how serious they are then look at these two links. last nights C4 news piece is powerfulFar from being irrelevant, momentum is building on Lloyds bank and, in my opinion, the closer the whole situation is scrutinised the more likely that PMG will become embroiled in it in one of numerous possible and expensive ways. But hey, perhaps ignorance really is bliss CSZ? After all, how could the company that employed one of the biggest fraudsters in UK history and owned the company at the heart of multiple frauds possibly have any exposure???[link]
blouson blouse
11 May 2018
Re: the long shadow KillermanJClearly the Confirmation Bias is strong with you !I note that you didn't answer my question about your position in and losses on PMG. I won't hold my breath .Despite your wishful thinking I didn't suffer any losses on PMG as I have never been long or short ( weird that you overlook what I said to make a point!)....probably a rare thing amongst this BB to not be nursing a loss.
killermanjarrow
11 May 2018
Re: the long shadow Blouse,"1. I'm not making inferences about Mary's purchase price- her previous posts make clear that she bought shares way above 200p about 4 years ago.."umm that's called an inference because you don't know whether she has bought or sold any since 2014.2. "[ I suffer losses too- but I cut them early ]" I now understand your motivation for posting. I'm sorry that you've lost money but I think you should get over it."3. You dismiss my posts as 'carp' (presumably a typo, but you mean rubbish?) yet you have not denied any of the facts I have posted and instead play the man not the ball."I'm not denying that some form of fallout is possible. I'm saying that the risk is so small that it's not worth worrying about.4. Thanks for pointing out that I'm stating my opinion. "5. The suggestion that HBOS has "accepted responsibility" is laughable."It's a fact that they have accepted responsibility and set up a compensation fund. You do not pay compensation unless you have accepted the wrong doing.This article explains how Lloyds/HBOS initially wouldn't accept responsibility but were forced to after the criminal convictions[link] "The convictions have at last forced Lloyds to accept some responsibility. The bank has conceded that it will have to pay the victims compensation and has set aside £100m for the purpose."6. I give up. Good luck with your non-investment here.
wikkid22
11 May 2018
Re: Blousen CSZ you used a 4 year old article last week as your proof of 1Bn barrels and the figures it contained said the same figures that I am saying are true and that you are arguing against. How old is too old to use and when is fact argued against? You need to get the life I think.
callsignzulu
11 May 2018
Re: Blousen What a load of irrelevant waffle you write ! FEED coming soon for the Scott platform tie in.Canna wait !
blouson blouse
10 May 2018
Re: Blousen LOLIf you believe that then it explains a lot about your judgement which resulted in your losses on this share. I'm sure those former employees/associates of PMG who were sentenced to 47 years in jail just over a year ago wish you were right and it could all be forgotten. But unfortunately there is so much publicity about it that new enquiries and investigations are springing up regularly and more and more victims seem to be coming out of the woodwork too. And with each one new pieces of the puzzle emerge as they collaborate.Thames Valley Police alone spent £4m on this by last year and are still going strong- so they obviously believe there's much more naughtiness to prosecute .Of course it is possible that none of this results in anything, but I wouldn't bet (or should I say, invest?) on that in view of how it is snowballing. And it is possible that PMG somehow escapes any impact from the investigations, civil and criminal actions despite it's director and subsidiary being at the heart of multiple frauds for 18 months or so. personally I think it would be useful to know what PMG knew when they jettisoned Quayside . Did they know of the fraud and keep quiet? And why shouldn't PMG be vicariously liable for the actions of David Mills and Quayside whilst they were at PMG?
callsignzulu
10 May 2018
Blousen You are referring to an 9 year ago article.....Get a life ! It’s History.....
blouson blouse
10 May 2018
Re: the long shadow PS It also appears , if Ian Fraser (who Mary mentioned)is to be believed, that PMG and Tom Cross have previously created a false market in PMG shares [link] Tom Cross claimed this creation of the false market was inadvertent, but it makes me wonder if the £2m liability from Mills to PMG was ever repaid at all? As Quayside failed probably not. Perhaps someone from PMG itself can tell us? One would hope that PMG would have made a clear and prominent disclosure if it wasn't paid but then again I do find the governance of this company far from ideal. A few weeks ago they had to issue an RNS apology/correction and for years they have lent money to Tom and other of his companies, which whilst disclosed isn't best practice.If TC's other companies could raise the money cheaper they would- which indicates PMG is lending the money below commercial rates. It's also odd that PMG raises money and when it doesn't need it instead of returning it to shareholders it lends it to the CEO to try and make a return for him and his associates in a completely different company.That seems to leave much of the risk with PMG yet the upside with TC.And isn't TC's skill meant to be in identifying cheap assets and buying them? So if he hasn't been able to reply his capital should that reflect on his remuneration?More questions than answers but as far as I am concerned they are red flagsWhilst clearly not connected to the Mills/Quayside issues, it doesn't fill me with confidence of a board with an ability to pay sufficient attention to governance and detail- which does have a read across to the Mills i
