weg back, page-111

You are correct patprice. And in this instance, it appears that PLV and WEG reached an agreement to waive that CP that wasn't fulfilled at the time.

What gets to me, is as to why the Board previously agreed to what Tony was doing in severing the ties with the JV, and now they did a backwards somersault and openly admitting/acknowledging that it was due to us not being able to work with WEG. "Perceived inability to work closely with WEG".

Has Tony being made the scapegoat in order to facilitate the provision of urgently needed funds from the Chinese.??
Was that one of the CP that had to be fulfilled in order for the loan to proceed and get the green light.??

I know that these sort of things happens everyday in the Corporation World and that we have to learn to live with it if we want to invest in the sharemarket.
What I am objecting to, is to be treated like idiots and mushrooms. Nothing wrong with that.

maps correctly pointed out to two different scenarios supplied by the company and both of them differ to a grea extent and contradict each other.:

""A) On 28 Dec the ann. stated PLV had terminated the J.V because the C.P. had not been met. Whatever that C.P. was.

B) Now in the most recent ann. the termination of the previous JV was due to the perceived ability of PLV to work closely with WEG.""

End of maps quoation......


Now which one of the two above scenarios supplied to us, do we have to believe.??

Finally, and to make it very clear to everyone here, I am not downramping, far form it. I am just calling for some straight answers here. After all I have a lot of skin in this company and I feel that it is my right, the same as for any other investor, to raise that issue and be guided properly by the poeple that run this Board.

But again, they could have been gagged in such a way by the Lawyers, that it will never be able to be clarified.