ValueBuddies.com : Value Investing Forum - Singapore, Hong Kong, U.S.

May we know whether the legal firm is representing a public listed company or a person? Did the lawyer letter mention who is the client?

(26-02-2012, 05:55 PM)wsreader Wrote: [ -> ]May we know whether the legal firm is representing a public listed company or a person? Did the lawyer letter mention who is the client?

The letter is from the general counsel cc legal counsel of the company and represents the company and it's chairman. See the AR and you'll know who the general counsel is.

(26-02-2012, 07:43 PM)cyclone Wrote: [ -> ]

(26-02-2012, 05:55 PM)wsreader Wrote: [ -> ]May we know whether the legal firm is representing a public listed company or a person? Did the lawyer letter mention who is the client?

The letter is from the general counsel cc legal counsel of the company and represents the company and it's chairman. See the AR and you'll know who the general counsel is.

I asked because some wrote of questioning this matter during agm. Since agm is to discuss matters relating to the company, it may not be appropriate if it is representing an individual and no company resources was used. Thanks for your info.
(not vested, just curious)

(26-02-2012, 08:18 PM)wsreader Wrote: [ -> ]

(26-02-2012, 07:43 PM)cyclone Wrote: [ -> ]

(26-02-2012, 05:55 PM)wsreader Wrote: [ -> ]May we know whether the legal firm is representing a public listed company or a person? Did the lawyer letter mention who is the client?

The letter is from the general counsel cc legal counsel of the company and represents the company and it's chairman. See the AR and you'll know who the general counsel is.

I asked because some wrote of questioning this matter during agm. Since agm is to discuss matters relating to the company, it may not be appropriate if it is representing an individual and no company resources was used. Thanks for your info.
(not vested, just curious)

If it is representing an individual, that individual jolly well be the one paying the money. But since it is from the general counsel of the company, company resources has been used to send this letter!

Shareholders better question whether its in the interest of the company to undertake such an action!

(23-02-2012, 05:57 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: [ -> ]

(23-02-2012, 05:48 PM)cfa Wrote: [ -> ]Just look at CNA forum, i think they should receive few lawyer letters everyday.
So far members of VB are very discipline as compared to that of CNA, why target at VB ?
If the truth really hurt , should we stop telling the truth ?

The likely reason is VB is a very serious investment forum as compared with CNA. I think most serious investors do not take CNA comments seriously.

Another possible reason is some investors had probably emailed the company on the company's thread in VB and raised queries on some of the quoted allegations.
In such case, the easier way is to take down the postings via lawyer letters.

As for Truths, I could not say for certain that all allegations made in this forum are true.

To some extent I think this forum is gaining more recognition and traction than previously thought. It is being taken seriously. More people are following it. Kudos to the administrators who have done a great job running this forum.
This whole episode is a wake up call- the internet is a mighty tool that reaches out to the 'four corners of the world'. Hopefully the saga ends here. Let's channel our energies to making this the best investment forum in S'pore. It is a good resource for the companies as well. I hope that the Company will not go on to take legal action. Somehow, I do not think that it will. On our part we have to be careful and responsible in our postings.
Great job Cyclone, Kazukirai and Musicwhiz!!.... and to all those who contributed their valuable thoughts here. Am humbly learning the ropes of value investing..

BTW is the company happy with the actions taken so far?

I doubt that it has anything to do with the recognition of the forum although I hope so. IIRC, someone in the forum sent IR of the company to check certain facts, which probably lead to the whole legal counsel thing.

(26-02-2012, 09:00 PM)VestedInterest Wrote: [ -> ]BTW is the company happy with the actions taken so far?

The deemed defamatory posts has been deleted and I have told them. It seems that they are happy from replied email.

(26-02-2012, 09:03 PM)cyclone Wrote: [ -> ]

(26-02-2012, 09:00 PM)VestedInterest Wrote: [ -> ]BTW is the company happy with the actions taken so far?

The deemed defamatory posts has been deleted and I have told them. It seems that they are happy from replied email.

I wonder if the company is also happy that the news has spread to CNA Market Talk forum.

Ok this is fact. Nothing defamatory.

http://forum.channelnewsasia.com/showthr...luebuddies

the year of the black water dragon was warned with many evil stars such as law suits, quarrels etc..let us all take good care.

(26-02-2012, 10:07 PM)arthur Wrote: [ -> ]

(26-02-2012, 09:03 PM)cyclone Wrote: [ -> ]

(26-02-2012, 09:00 PM)VestedInterest Wrote: [ -> ]BTW is the company happy with the actions taken so far?

The deemed defamatory posts has been deleted and I have told them. It seems that they are happy from replied email.

.

The deemed defamatory posts has been deleted and I have told them. It seems that they are happy from replied email.

I wonder if the company is also happy that the news has spread to CNA Market Talk forum.

Ok this is fact. Nothing defamatory.

http://forum.channelnewsasia.com/showthr...luebuddies
[/quote]

Obvious, but the rich can afford legal suits and pay legal costs, the small and poor can't afford this luxury.