NTL - New Talisman Mine - New board & Directors

[Paint it Black]

New Talisman is aware of the allegations published in NZ Herald online late on Friday 3 July in relation to the company CEO.
We understand that the allegations were made by an administrator on Sharetrader after the Company CEO wrote to Sharetrader to complain and to request they investigate and consider removing malicious postings being published on the Sharetrader.co.nz site with respect to the Company CEO personally and the Company.
The Company is investigating the content of the postings made on Sharetrader.co.nz that have been alleged by Sharetrader to have been made by the Company CEO, to ascertain whether the content of those postings gives rise to concerns in respect of disclosure requirements.
The Company, will not be commenting on this matter until the outcome of those enquiries are complete.

No, no, no. Is someone misleading the Board ? The issue was identified in post #5446 by Vince. If you are a CEO or similar then you should id yourself before posting comments. It was not about malicious comments but rather hiding behind a nom de plume

zacman[/QUOTE]
This is becoming even more murky. Am I right in thinking that MH wrote to Sharetrader on behalf of NTL complaining about malicious statements while in parallel allegedly responding to these 'anonymously' through Sharetrader? What, if anything, was MH telling the rest of the Board while this was happening? What triggered Vince into investigating Bullish rather than the source of these statements? I also look forward to the outcome of Jonu's moderation enquiry. This needs to be resolved decisively to protect NTL with the press already on the trail.

[Stumpynuts]

This is becoming even more murky. .....

I agree.
I want to know the timeline - What events lead up to Bullish getting banned?
Did MH message this website directly just before this site's admin investigation?

It's starting to become a case of he said, she said.
Someone could end up with libel/slander accusations?

[stoploss]

I agree.
I want to know the timeline - What events lead up to Bullish getting banned?
Did MH message this website directly just before this site's admin investigation?

It's starting to become a case of he said, she said.
Someone could end up with libel/slander accusations?

It sounds pretty simple to me imo it looks like CEO was posting as Bullish on this site and not disclosing who he was . Obviously signed up with an email for this .
Then seperately he took exception to some of the posters on here ( read the thread) bagging him for poor performance etc .... maybe he used the same email to complain to sharetrader with and admin put 2 & 2 together .......

[Ltw]

Gee I find this all quite amusing
You lot are like a pack of rapid dogs or my kids on FB
all of a sudden you've got some dirt to throw and everyone jumps on the band wagon Ra Ra this Bla Bla that
I'm not supporting actions or condoning them yet but all im seeing is a whoile lot of past or non-shareholders making a big fuss over this so called penny dreadful stock without all the facts.
I think Jonu's comment is right take a deep breath people let the correct people deal with it and move on.
As for the SP it seems to be holding up well considering - you might not see it this cheep again.

[suse]

"after the Company CEO wrote to Sharetrader to complain and to request they investigate" Are they saying that Matt Hill was the one who wrote to Sharetrader to complain and request the investigation?

Yeah I read that comment and thought that'll teach him, he pissed on his own shoes.

[Landyman]

Ironic that he may be the cause of his own demise, which in turn could lead to NTLs success.

Tongue in cheek, well...

Still a holder, please disregard my opinions.
Discl: Not employed by NTL or any other mining company. Not related to MH, and if he drives a Landy, I didnt sell it to him.

[Waltzing]

"Take a deep breath Waltzing."

i always take a breath when reading Lord Denning. I always appreciate the technical posts as i dont follow gold mining but boards conduct is under the companies act. On the surface there may well be nothing much to answer for but upon an audit matters can and often do come to light that contravene company law. Dont under estimate the technical nature of procedures.

[bucko]

I sent an email this afternoon voicing my displeasure as a share holder and got the 'no comment' response.

It's an election year, thankfully the Green party spend more time focused on welfare than environmental issues otherwise this could go down a very steep slope rather quickly.

I don't know if anyone follows the NBA but Kevin Durant was caught having several social media burner accounts that he used to talk himself up, this is a little more serious of a situation and sure does make me wonder...the culture and accepted norms of a company usually flow from the top down, I sure hope that isn't the case with this kind of behaviour.

[t.rexjr]

A company representative needs to make full disclosure of who they are regardless of the rules on this website. Their utterances have direct consequences for the company (and themselves personally) in a financial context. Whether they are disclosing anything that is not public knowledge is somewhat irrelevant. Without disclosure of who they are, they are effectively manipulating peoples opinions and potentially their financial decisions. For what cause who knows, but the consequence is almost certainly financial...

[Rosco]

Sadly, I suspect Matthew Hill has the ultimate say in any communications. I would hazard to guess that he most likely even wrote the letter released today. I would not expect any action from NTL unless it is forced on by the FMA.

Regardless of the outcome, the credibility of the company IMO has been shot to smithereens.