dear oh dear yuffy

a bee in your bonet and a chip on your shoulder

wouldn't you need a 2/3 majority to dump steig of the dump? that would equate to roughly 200 million of the little wrigglers?

yes Steig of the dump is clutching at straws but so are the action group.

it's all well and good mustering up 10% of the collective shares in issue to requisition an EGM or table motions at an AGM, but quite another getting them through.

Former Stream holders have circa 80 million of the wrigglers leaving circa 220 million floating about, it could be very difficult to remove Steig n Dilts.

The race is not a foregone conclusion

It must be difficult for you yuff seeing all that shareholder value evaporate into thin air. 84p to 3p, that's quite a fall.

yuff,
you have as much chance of calling an EGM, changing management, and getting to run the company as you have picking a winning share, or for TAD to reach 1 by Xmas- you and the rest of the cardigan clad dreamers will be crushed by costs before the paper dries.
You live in a dream world man, where I try to steal your (silly) alias, God knows why I would want it?, and where people post with hundreds of aliases trying to pull TAD down.
Let me tell you a secret, I have traded TAD long and short for years , among many better companies, I have consistently forecast its trend, and made money both long and short, mainly short.
Now get a reality check on your mind from a highly qualified quack, before you go over the edge and start wearing your Napoleon hat again ( the one in the safe-remember?)
I see the new TAD web-site has posted a hurried warning that they are not really serious, just in case they get a writ,oh as a ps,
you and the others have NO IDEA how many shares Steig has on his side, the man is NOT a fool,

lol!!!!!!!

Snappy

You are getting like Ollie, I think you are wrong when you say a two thirds majority is required. At an EGM to pass the agenda its a straight fight majority wins.

Unless you know different of course.

M

Removal of a director is a mine-field, consider the House of Lords ruling, where a dismissed director (who was also a shareholder) was held to be entitled to have the company wound up under the Insolvency Act 1986.
Has anyone found out what the Service Contract situation is, what will the pay off be, whom pays it, TAD certainly can`t afford it,the whole thing is a dream which will turn into a nightmare for those putting their names to this nonesense, a bunch of losing punters from a few bb`s take on the House of Lords????,
sell up and buy some proper shares.
Good fun to see the egg on face though.

Quote
"An extraordinary, or special resolution is passed by a majority of not less than 75%
of the votes, cast in person or by proxy -----

Section 378(1) and (2) of the Companies Act 1989
.....

This and a hundred other legal traps await.Whom is paying for the Groups QC I wonder at 1,000 an hour- oh and ML that sneer on your and yuffs` face at anyone talking sense will soon be a grimace,
have a nice Thanksgiving.

I thought it was a two thirds majority but it would appear that it is a three quarters.

So you will need Steig (and the rest of the Stream Theory 80 million issue) to vote himself and Dilts off the board. Hardly likely unless of course the payoff is worth more than the shares themselves.

The action group will have a real struggle

Exactly, and if he hasn`t got a 5 year `golden handshake contract` i`ll be very suprised, a phyrric victory if ever.
Perhaps the `cardies` will scrape up the severance pay- oops silly me they will anyway from the GEM drawdown to pay for it and another -25% dilution.

They are all dreamers,

Ml
They haven't got a clue.
Seems strange that SW thinks he can call an EGM and vote DL out with just 10 % of the share capital, eventually, but when the boot is on the other foot olie thinks that the shareholders, with 50 % more shares than SW and crew, can't do the same.
Someone is mis informed here and I I would think SW would have a better idea than olie and snappy about company law.
SW gambled that his 40m shares would see him through , simple fact is he didn't reckon on the shareholders getting way more shares than him at the EGM, either he does a deal or he's gone uinless he buys another 20m shares that will see the price rise nicely if he does that.
Amazing how olie thinks its one rule for SW and another fopr shareholders perhaps olie has forgot that SW is also a shareholder, once SW is voted off the board the next move at the AGM will be to look at his remuneration package which will then be based on performance afterall if he was able to try and justify a pay rise at the last agm the baord will certainly be able to justify apay decrease at the next agm.

Ps olie how right were you last time when the price was 4/5.5 you forecast 3p, only problem was it hit 28p before 3p, you huff and you puff but you won't beat the yuff. LOL

yuff

Why do you try and convince that fool oile or blinger or even yuff when he tried to pretend he was you.
Granted olie is good with words but sadly he is driven by a misguided perception that he can read and understand markets better than anyone else.
He has no idea what westerberg holds-what I can tell you is tha Westerbergs ally on the Tad board holds nothing and those ex ST employees have long sold out.

I have cast my vote to support DL.

Olie cannot cast a vote as he is not a shareholder.

Why he continues to stalk these free bb's is beyond me.
The man seems to have a mental illness-very very sad.

GTC

Ollie has been ill for a long long time.


M

Ml & GLC

I think you are both right, obviously blinger will return with his sidekick Snappy.
LOL

Well one thing for sure ML, you yuffer/puffer and the chinless wonder make me feel very sick, in fact I feel the nausea now .
Chinless, that is exactly what I said you berk, NOBODY knows how many shares Westerberg has gotten behind him .
I just hope that you three get caught up in the costs, now that really WILL be funny.
Buy a book yuffer and join the real world of Company Law- try Farrars` Company Law,for a start, although I don`t think they have it in talking books form yet, ask chinless wonder to read it to you - looks as though it knows a bit about the law.
As for retrospectively changing Westerbergs Conditions of Employment- well yuff it shows you for the clown you are- geddoutahere man and get real .

ROTFFLMFAO!!!!!!!!@yuffer/puffer and gang and the EGM

ps I see that the Action Group organisers are getting desperate now, it appears it has just dawned on them they need 75% of the vote, clueless.

I keep coming on this thread hoping to find out something about the company (tad), oh well dream on!

No this is the thread where adolescents insult their superiors, pretending they are experts in buying shares and then watching them fall by 96%.
Without a doubt it is peopled by such experts, listen to yuff and gang, read their posts and see the truth, its a revelation .

I bet Steig is enjoying his turkey and having a huge laugh at The Action Men, I know I am.

WE ARE ALONE BUT UNAFRAID, WHO NEEDS THE OTHE 74.999%???
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Love the bluies ML, M&S were they ?, or S&M????????-Oh and boxing gloves yuffer- same old problem, never mind,no hard `feelings` there then?????????

YUFF,
Don`t get legal advice before you get involved

PLEASE!!!!!

Good boy!!!!!!!!!!

Last post tonight

ML can you and the remaining `shirt yuffters` please confirm your TAD holdings,Paul Tibble
is desperate for the last 74.9%

ROTFFLMFAO!!!!!!!!

COMING SOON - Tadpole Eposide III - Revenge of the Soph

The loose association of Tadpole shareholders trying to remove Steig of the dump from the board.

Spot the yuff competition

Spot which one is yuff in the picture and post your entry on this thread.

Rules:

A grand prize of 1 Tadpole share will be issued to the winner (excludes brokers costs and stamp duty fees)

Members of the Tadpole shareholders association and their famliy members are not permitted to enter.

The judges decision is final and correspodence will only be entered into if considered humourous.

The competition organiser reserves the right to substitute the grand prize for a sherbert dip or a two pence piece.