lol pach

do you cover motoring law by any chance?

Has Steig been dumped yet?

not yet MM

what should be worrying Tadpole holders is what will happen if Steig gets dumped, will he in turn dump his shares in an unforgiving market.

snappy

More than happy for Steig to get the boot which is looking more and more likely.
He ain't going to get much for 20m shares at this price m and if he thinks his life's work is worth 150k good on him.
GTC
Stop flirting with blinger you know if he gets too close to Jamie's mum the sparks could fly now they have both admitted their problems!

There goes the GEM 1m then, 2p soon

lololol!!!!!!!!!!

No EGM told you, not by the cardies, that is for sure.

Poor old yuff and at Xmas too , more losses, does the brain hurt as much yuffer????

Snappy - motoring law? I can't see the significance (or the joke?). Please enlighten me, or shouldn't I ask?!

I think pach covers tyre repairs

yuff, can you explain the joke?Has the medication reached such heights-Jamie`s mum--ehhh??What is that???

All this at Xmas too, the yuffer breakdown time, ah the motoring analogy continues-----

Snap- I too have chinless filtered, gay marriages are all right for some , but , well?? draw a veil I think.

The dreadful truth is that the share price has been stuffed, the same board are in- and WILL remain- after 20 years they are inviolate, 100k salaries all round chaps, triples at the EGM, oh and up the cardies,

sad!!!!!!!

and the saddest part is that the Army now know it, and I told them, but they never have listened

MerryXmas

ps who pays the stamps and costs now then???

olie
show a bit of Christmas spirit......we aint all as smart as you.

I think that the more charitable posters would Paypal a few bob to yuff on the In2t
` voting` web site.
I have started the process by sending 1, let`s hope the fund will accelerate; 1 from each person who has voted there will give him a massive 52 for treatment, that should buy him at least a new cardie for the winter.
Poor old soul.

super`

Smart is as smart does , the slicks try to ramp companies, the smart ones buy/ sell and go fishing.........

ps just doing my 2004/05 IR CGT stuff, and noticed this trade of mine--

17/08/04 bgt 15001 TAD @ 10.75p- 16,277
13/09/04 sold ditto ditto @12.75p 19,049

Its for trading, I could show you stuff in reverse where I shorted with similar results , but modesty forbids

tight lines!!!

pps some prat will check back on the trade and find its true-lololol!!!!!!!!

pps some prat will check back on the trade and find its true-lololol!!!!!!!!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

no Keith has stopped trading a few Tadpole round the edges and has resumed his career cleaning the bogs in Richmond park so will be too busy to check the trade reports for accuracy.

That's not the Keith who was taking shareholders for a ride (by helicopter) but the other one taking them for a ride, who was seen heading over the horizon in a convoy of white mercs.

sorry pach the motoring law bit was completely off-topic. I will post an off topic question on this thread tomorrow and if you have the time a response would be most welcome.

cheers

Snappy - I am waiting with baited breath - a Christmas quiz with 10 Tad shares as a prize? I will clear my desks this afternoon and log on to the Britannica website. Fingers poised.

super
Sounds like olie is being his usual obnoxious self, still in self denial is he?

FAO Pach,

Evidential integrity

Im contesting an allegation of exceeding the speed limit on an English highway and have received various responses to requests for evidence from the CPS.

One part of the evidence is a calibration certificate for a laser operated speed detection device. On checking with the Home Office Scientific branch I note that the calibration certificate does not appear to meet their requirements.

http://hosdb.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/docs/18-98%20-%20Guide%20to%20Calibration%20Requirements%20for%20Traffic%20Enforcement%20Equipment.pdf

Should I object to this being submitted as evidence at the case management hearing or what until the proper trial and object when they try and rely on it in court? (i.e. disclose part of my defence at an early stage or try to catch them unaware)

Ive already been in touch with the Home Office to ask their opinion but so far have received no response.

Snappy - spoke to a criminal litigator acquaintance who says the following (no liability accepted whasoever - this is a non-legal, gratuitous piece of friendly advice ..... add any other disclaimer that you so choose !)
1. You cannot do anything before you appear at the Magistrates Court
2. Present the calibration certificate and a clear copy of the Home Office calibration requirements
3. Request that the speed camera evidence is not admissible in evidence before the court as it does not conform to minimum calibration requirements under the law.

It seems that you have a very good chance of success, on the basis of current court practice - but it is not absolutely open and shut. Best of luck and stay in 3rd gear from now on.

cheers Pach and yes I will consider that totally non binding.

It's was a handheld laser speed detection device. In court tomorrow for a case management hearing so I will object to it at tomorrows hearing.

I'll try to stick to 3rd gear Pach

A great post from nkb156 on iii - hope he/she won't mind me pasting it here

Mon 22:59 Muppets... nkb156 31

It took Greg Bolcer little under 12 months to start from nothing and create a viable start-up business.

During the same time it took SW little under 12 months to take an established business and convert it to nothing.

Our old friend Tony Caplin thought he invented the internet "I am the father of the internet" were his words in public.

Caplin was one of our non-executive directors. He did not write newsletters he created news of the criminal investigation type

Keith Bigsby went on helicopter rides and developed an interest in expensive wine all on company expense.

Keith was our financial guru who we employed to pay $24M for a company that was in debt and has so far managed to sell well nothing. He sold our hardware division and they became profitable overnight! Apparently he came from SUN and WANG.

We were also very luck to have Hugh. He was our company PR Consultant who kept telling us that the narrative was looking better than ever.

Whenever the company needed to give the share price a boost he was the man for the job. He could spin any story and get it published in respectable media problem was it was unethical the way he did things.

Then there was David Lea. I can't blame him because whilst all this was going on I suspect he was too busy researching into the best pension deals - SIP Pension, Stakeholder Pension maybe a SIP or two or voluntary contributions, tax exempt property - maybe a pink cottage.

And finally there was us buying shares, researching siht on Google trying to find leads for the company, promoting it whenever the opportunity arose. Analysing to death every buy and sell we never found out the truth - until now.

At one time our product portfolio was bigger than Walmarts but we sold sod all.

And just when one man was about to make a difference guess what?They fired him. Even that was not a simple process. Apparently they fired the wrong man confusion in the conference call or something. David meant one thing and Keith took it to mean another etc. etc. etc.

Someone please tell me - how can one company attract and hire so many muppets?

For me the correct answer to that question alone would be worth at least 10p a share.

I suppose its business as usual:

So when is the AGM?
And was that a 1M buy in disguise