Right on que Jantimot. Well done. I posted no opinions and didn't attempt to paint the announcement in any particular light. I just pointed out that the facts that were stated contradicted some specific statements which were made by the company. Nothing more, nothing less. I even left all of your posts completely alone you will note.
As predicted in my post you turned up to label this as "spin". You then added your own interpretation on a few matters which also seems to be divertent from the documented evidence. As usual the facts tell a different story to your one. If you read the company announcement on July 7 where the company announced the agreement with OW it specifically states:
"CuDeco Ltd would like to advise our shareholders that under the terms of the MOU with Oceanwide International Resource Investment Co Ltd (“Oceanwide”), Oceanwide were to subscribe for a further 14.95m shares in CuDeco at $3.80 per share for a total consideration of $56.81m. We confirm that Oceanwide have complied with the terms of the MOU and today subscribed for the 14.95m shares.
Furthermore, under the MOU, Oceanwide is to subscribe for a further 15m shares @ $3.80 to increase their shareholding in CuDeco to 19.90% subject to FIRB approvals."
This is what the company who have a copy of the agrement said but you turn up Jantimot with your own version of the facts. You tell us that is was a contract rather than an MOU. You say "OW have broken the share purchase agreement, signed, sealed and delivered. Not the MOU. They are in breach of contract".
Since your version of the content of the agreement differs substancially from that of the company one must assume that you have some facts to backup your claims. Can you support your claims or its there just a little irony in you labeling my post as "spin" ?
Can't be bothered with the rest of the waffle or I'll be here all afternoon.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?