Up to the old tricks....this RNS appears to regurgitate the information in leach processing section of the 2nd April RNS. What's new?
I do remember, they wouldn't have the nerve to still be around surely? Or even trumpeting that they are still buying shares? Who was that?
Yes fine thanks. No apologies whatsoever. The BOD have an obligation to carry out due diligence on behalf of the shareholders and the old team of reprobates appear to have got off more or less scot-free. Hopefully for the long term holders this new lot do their jobs properly. They need a full BFS as a minimum to reassure this is not a repeat debacle.
Hi shady....how you doing? It's a shame for everyone involved that nothing has really changed (just talk of what might be possible, still nothing sufficiently proven financially viable) and they are looking for new mugs to suck in sadly.
This is bizarre. It's like groundhog day. As milton states 5 years to prove the resource and the fun and games continue. As for the new guy. 51 appointments in 5 years, well that's ok then. lol
Yes mushty at least a bank will ensure thorough due dilligence even a BFS. Or a JV with a reputable Co. Anything to reduce the chance of the merry-go-round starting all over again without guarantees.
Good point bryn........if using the same office/address its a bit of a giveaway......is it not.
harlequin on papaer YES in reality YES until proven otherwise. In fact they may be a liability as will they need cleaning up/capped at some stage?
scotch that would make more sense ie "once proved" the so called experts have got it wrong before! The key thing here is that insufficient due dilligence was not carried out on a number of occasions. This is the responsibility of all the BOD & Co.