InvestorsHub Logo

FACTCHECK

11/10/10 3:10 PM

#676 RE: JB_Jones #675

To Mr. Jones. My position is an assistant moderator for company on this board, serving at the pleasure of Mr. Saviano who clears all of my posts for the company.

As to me wanting to see your FGBF cert, the answer is no. Please re-read my post, I believe the request was that you, via private email communicate your proof ownership directly with Mr. Saviano.

THE REMARKS HEREIN ABOVE ARE MY OWN AND ARE NOT TO BE TAKEN AS COMING IN A FORMAL POST FROM THE COMPANY.

Newsworthy

11/10/10 3:29 PM

#681 RE: JB_Jones #675

It is perfectly clear what they are asking for isn't it? Send them a copy of your share certificate without anything blacked out. They will do what they can to sort out your position.

What's the problem with doing that? They can then check up with the Share Transfer Agent and get to the bottom of your comments.

It's a fair offer in my book.

You say that you are already working with the Share Transfer Agent, if you don't mind saying, when did you make contact last?

I don't work for the Corporation, but I do think it's time we found out what it is you are about.

The bald eagle

11/10/10 4:09 PM

#690 RE: JB_Jones #675

in your post you state the following-

"I would assume that any corporation can request, from NAMA, the ability to buy assets which are for sale, right? I would hope NAMA would support FGBF if FGBF said they had $5 BILLION to spend on real estate"

yes, any corporation can request to purchase assets from nama. However, what gives me confidence in this deal is that Nama have chosen to respond to 1st global’s approach and have agreed to sell assets to the corporation. Being well acquainted with the operations of Nama, I know that it would not risk the reputation of the agency by dealing with corporations which are incapable of funding acquisitions. This is specifically so in this instance, as 1st global seem to be the first entity which has successfully negotiated with Nama, and as such would have been subject to rigorous scrutiny.

Secondly, I have done my dd on the people involved in Ireland, and these are the people who have negotiated the options with Nama and with other entities. I would have no fears that these people would have identified the best opportunities.

You have serious issues with the principals involved from the American side. Perhaps your fears are well grounded, or perhaps are just of a personal nature. You seem to be repeating the same point over and over, and you along with others are probably succeeding in keeping the share price down for the moment. Take a bow. Other than owning shares, I have no interest in the corporation, indeed I had concerns about a legal challenge to Nama which has now diminished, but for me this will be a winner