OmniChart

OXS Nick763 29 Nov 2015

Re: ***What the .....!!!*** Psyclopes, good post. Your exactly right and what appears to be conveniently forgotten (by some) is that Oxus won the jurisdiction. Metal-Tech's case didn't get past the jurisdiction stage because of bribery / corruption. To think that White and Case would not bring up bribery/ corruption if they could at the jurisdiction stage is someone who is either ill-informed or simply mischief making. Additionally, Calunius would have done due diligence and sought guarantees on bribery issues prior to taking the case on and they also have the right to drop the case at any stage.

ATST give the dog a bone 29 Nov 2015

Re: Forseke resigns resigns eh?the only thing of interest is how much was her payoff ? why do shareholders get stuffed with these incompetents and then have to pay them silly money to leave only to hear they land a job at say RBS or TSCO running the same formulaic model Hopefully the yanks will break the UK Board cycle or milk merry go round for has been CEOs and Chairs - ie get a massive multi million payoff from the company you've just about bust; book a holiday in the Seycelles and be on the phone to your headhunter mates who in turn call on a few favours,. Result will be a formal waving into the new role, then hire PwC / KPMG and give them £millions to dust down the old reliable plan for growth ; get the board to throw in the kitchen sink and keep them sweet andstum by bribing them with a big pay hike , 3 mths later call the press and show them the powerpoint slides. Work on getting rid of the board directors who opposed your appointment and confirm to the head-hunter over lunch that the favour owed will be honoured as soon as necessary. it's all too common business practice .

SEV Roger Baron 29 Nov 2015

Re: riddler podcast - picks Servision Well from what Gideon says, only a matter of time until it is £1+.

OXS Psyclops 29 Nov 2015

Re: ***What the .....!!!*** What is also basic Penny/Petty is that the Anti Bribery and Corruption act of 2010 takes precedent over all else and if OXS are shown to have even paid a "facilitation fee" then the BoD and individual are liable for prison.To be covered by this act one only needs to have a single employee based in the UK to have it's entire business globally under scrutiny and any payments made to a government official (as would almost be a certainty in the case of OXS paying a fee to operate/gain the licence) are seen as especially high end offending.It would seem that you and David are the embodiment of idle hands make for devil's mischief.David Uzbek is proven to have stretched the truth and his connections to the company and was outed some time ago by Richard Wilkins and you were recently put in your place by the same man.You know they read these boards and you know they are pretty hot on BS being spread so I suggest you both take a step back from spouting around bribery as fact when in fact the very you carry on a conversation in a public forum on this leaves you both open to Libel as there certainly is no evidence to support this - do you think we would be approaching 18 months after the final hearing if this was actually a factor? Do you not think Ms Lam would have found this and had it thrown out?Think about things for a bit...

AMFW Damp Seaweed 29 Nov 2015

Re: Dividend cut Kenj2,You are absolutely right from a T/A perspective this stock is heavily oversold.If it wasn't for the fact that I am heavily over invested in Oil and oil price related / dependant companies then I would certainly be investigating this equity.However I can't and I suspect it might take some time before the price of oil recovers and investment in the oil industry resumes. All of which is not necessarily a problem if you are patient and investing for the long term.

QPP eagle51 29 Nov 2015

Re: Then Mel - on a serious note, why do you say: "SGH falls on bank covenants. Oh dear. Happy shorters".Are you saying S&G has breached repayment or servicing terms? I can't find any internet references to alleged current breaches. What is 'Watchit'? The following was written last July: "On Tuesday, Bloomberg reported the company had finalised a £419 million loan used to finance the $1.3 billion acquisition of the professional services unit of London listed firm Quindell. The revolving loan, denominated in both pounds and Australian dollars, was backed by seven lenders, the Bloomberg report said, and would be used to fund the acquisition, for general corporate purposes and to refinance existing debt. National Australia Bank, Westpac, Barclays, Citi, Royal Bank of Scotland, Macquarie and Australian-based loan investor Metric Partners signed up the loan, with the terms signed on June 19. Citi and Macquarie were underwriters of the $890 million equity-raising used to finance the acquisition of Quindell. The increase comes as Slater & Gordon managing director Andrew Grech seeks to reassure shareholders that the company is not in danger of breaching any covenants after the revelation of accounting errors sparked a 25 per cent slide in the share price on Monday.A spokeswoman from Slater & Gordon said the company's net debt position is unchanged and confirmed the company does not have any debt covenants linked to market capitalisation".Debt experts said that debt covenants linked to market capitalisation have largely been removed following the dramatic fall in Babcock & Brown shares, which triggered loan covenants that effectively gave lenders control of the company."As is customary, we have not released the details of our covenants to the market, but we are very comfortable with the 'covenant headroom' that exists, as are our financiers," the Slater & Gordon spokeswoman said.

OXS Pennyfalls 29 Nov 2015

Re: Phone number - sent you e-mail Inda...)But here's the gist..I won't be reporting anything on here regarding the conversation I have with David Uzbek..But what happens if, in the course of talking to DavidUzbek, or any man in the pub who used to work for Oxus, or an ex worker, or an auditor , or an official etc etc..., that information is picked up that could be useful ..or vital..?What If I heard something that afterwards I said; " Oh I sold all mine, I knew that might happen"..Very very unlikely, but I'v egot to say that this type of censorship of thought and what 's deemed to be acceptable and Message Boards crucifixion of Persons non Grata is baffling to me..All you should care about is KNOWLEDGE - good and bad. I don't get the angles on these boards many times.Why have you such a downer on DavidUzbekand such a tainted view, based on what? His having a negative outlook? How do you know he hasn't more to base that on than your positivity?if he worked in Uzbekistan I'd rather hear his views than most of the voices on here. He's more qualified to give background on the country, is he not?

UKW budu 29 Nov 2015

Qualified for ISA? Against Greencoat on this site, under Purchase Information, is is shown "ISA: No. " How come I had no problem buying it in an ISA on 31-12-2014? Change of rule since then perhaps?

QPP eagle51 29 Nov 2015

Re: On the other hand Oh. Sorry Mel. I'm always getting my worms mixed up.

PLE Ripley94 29 Nov 2015

Jim Mellon He holds 30%.Not sure if that's a good sign or not ?Anyone know when he got in and at what price.

QPP eagle51 29 Nov 2015

what's watchstone? I have finally realised that I'm bored. This 'safe' route has worn me out. When the sale of PSD (which many now think amounted to 'dodging a nuclear warhead' - I don't want to comment) was completed 6 long months ago, the company was armed with £650m. Phew, what do we do now chaps? I don't personally think it was necessary to promise the return of most of this to shareholders to get the deal away, but the directors did this. Why? I don't know - maybe they thought everyone had had enough, but that isn't what they said. Could the fact they would get an arm and a leg anyway for playing it totally safe (in the process also totally killing any upside in the share price) have influenced them? Surely not? No - that just wouldn't happen.What they said did not imply a focus on dull safety (which is what it has become, only it might not be safe if too much grass has now grown under their feet) was entirely different. They told us of a new, enterprising, tightly focused, 3 division business poised for growth, with £100m+ cash behind it to propel it forward. The £1 (absolute min) per share that was going to be returned in September, maybe October, wasn't needed and what's more, a lot of non-core companies would be sold and the money from those sales would also be returned, along with the money coming in quarterly from NIHL claims.What has happened since then? Virtually NOTHING they told us. Or so it would seem, although we can't yet be certain.Wouldn't it be funny if the court declined to approve the return of the £417m (which is now being shared by a few more people, thanks to the gratuitous issue of millions of options to certain favoured types?). They'd be forced to think of something to do with that £417m to make shareholders a buck. How much would it cost to buy S&G in a hostile bid I wonder? Don't worry - it won't happen because there's nothing in it for the directors, who continue to collect anyway until they're either booted out (who's going to do it?) because their job was done a while back (ever heard of limpets and barnacles?) or the business is broken up and sold. How likely is it we're going to learn, whenever someone eventually decides shareholders should be told what's really going on inside the company, that business is booming? One can read plenty about other companies moving ahead in the field (I don't buy 3 different fields) QPP now operates in, but there's no indication of how business is going in ours. I have a feeling there would have been snippets of info had QPP been forging ahead. If you click on any of the three icons on the page that says: "Quindell is changing", you are directed to the same page. Three distinct businesses? [link] I being excessively negative? It all seems a bit too comfortable for QPP's directors to me (I don't include Mukerjee, who's probably still trying to work out what to do with such a badly damaged brand, even with its new name).

OXS Pennyfalls 29 Nov 2015

***What the .....!!!*** I'm sorry guys (Bbanker et al), but ANYONE who does not know that Oxus were producing should not be here at all..This is BASIC.When people say DYOR, what does that mean? It means read the company accounts and reopors at the very least and learn something.To now know Oxus has been producing for years - I am staggered. This is THE ARBITRATION CASE!

OXS indaknow 29 Nov 2015

Re: Phone number - sent you e-mail PennyThere's no problem so long as you don't start spreading rubbish on this bb based on the guff you hear from David Uzbek. if you do, you'll be even more unpopular than you are on advfn....

ZOX Ripley94 29 Nov 2015

Re: Majedie asset & Zac Mir I have seen Majedia now hold 5.67 % i had seen 10% in July. Can not see when they reduced.

OXS BBanker 29 Nov 2015

Re: Fao Louise I had not realised that they were producing. That is really good news. Surely the shareholders will get something out of this as they have been stitched up to date. The legal process has taken far too long but the end must be close.