MUL - Multiemedia Limited
- Thread starter Joe Blow
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mul multiemedia limited
- Status
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
What are your thoughts on the airworks rollout of advertising in woolies? I read only 1 store so far, and have difficulty selling contracts. "Meeting forecasts will be a challenge."
Then again, if the advertising takes off, it will really take off. Why not buy then?
The greatest trick the devil ever did was to get the SMH to write up about MUL in the November spike and sucker a whole lot more people into this company
What are your thoughts on the airworks rollout of advertising in woolies? I read only 1 store so far, and have difficulty selling contracts. "Meeting forecasts will be a challenge."
Then again, if the advertising takes off, it will really take off. Why not buy then?
The greatest trick the devil ever did was to get the SMH to write up about MUL in the November spike and sucker a whole lot more people into this company
tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,400
- Reactions
- 6,317
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
Read through the 75 pages of this thread.
Holders are ALWAYS awaiting an announcement and ALWAYS being disappointed.
Humans are the dumbest of creatures they do the same thing day in and day out and expect a DIFFERENT result!!
el_ninj0 said:
Read through the 75 pages of this thread.
Holders are ALWAYS awaiting an announcement and ALWAYS being disappointed.
Humans are the dumbest of creatures they do the same thing day in and day out and expect a DIFFERENT result!!
tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,400
- Reactions
- 6,317
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
""Any predictions on when this one will start an upward trend again? Its looking very similar to the Oct Nov breakout to me. If I had any predictions it would be a jump by upto 1.5c within a week. Only a prediction though...""
""If its following its prevoius trend, then tommorow is when it will start to turn around. According to my calculations.""
Dreaming ---an unrealistic ambition.To fancy events.
Hope ------- to desire to more or less expect.
So I guess its actually following its current trend then not its previous trend.
""Any predictions on when this one will start an upward trend again? Its looking very similar to the Oct Nov breakout to me. If I had any predictions it would be a jump by upto 1.5c within a week. Only a prediction though...""
""If its following its prevoius trend, then tommorow is when it will start to turn around. According to my calculations.""
Dreaming ---an unrealistic ambition.To fancy events.
Hope ------- to desire to more or less expect.
So I guess its actually following its current trend then not its previous trend.
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
Sure, I was wrong, or mabey premature?
We cant be right all the time...
tech/a said:""Any predictions on when this one will start an upward trend again? Its looking very similar to the Oct Nov breakout to me. If I had any predictions it would be a jump by upto 1.5c within a week. Only a prediction though...""
""If its following its prevoius trend, then tommorow is when it will start to turn around. According to my calculations.""
Dreaming ---an unrealistic ambition.To fancy events.
Hope ------- to desire to more or less expect.
So I guess its actually following its current trend then not its previous trend.
Sure, I was wrong, or mabey premature?
We cant be right all the time...
Porper
Ralph Nelson Elliott
- Joined
- 11 August 2004
- Posts
- 1,413
- Reactions
- 274
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
I tell you what chaps,
When you don't hold MUL you see it through different spectacles.
I sold out a few weeks ago (after the announcement) at 2.9c for a 30 % loss, which isn't good I know but it is nice to have that money to invest elsewhere.
I have to agree with some previous posts in that when you are holding a stock which is spiralling down you tend to hold onto every last breath of any posotive news (or what you perceive as posotive).
Looking in as a non holder now, it isn't difficult to see why the shareprice is going down still. Promises, promises and more promises that never seem to arrive, no cash and no decent announcements.Enough shares on issue to fill China, then of course the allegedly extremely dodgy management.
It is difficult to see a posotive outcome for MUL, but I hope I am wrong, I have been many times before.
I tell you what chaps,
When you don't hold MUL you see it through different spectacles.
I sold out a few weeks ago (after the announcement) at 2.9c for a 30 % loss, which isn't good I know but it is nice to have that money to invest elsewhere.
I have to agree with some previous posts in that when you are holding a stock which is spiralling down you tend to hold onto every last breath of any posotive news (or what you perceive as posotive).
Looking in as a non holder now, it isn't difficult to see why the shareprice is going down still. Promises, promises and more promises that never seem to arrive, no cash and no decent announcements.Enough shares on issue to fill China, then of course the allegedly extremely dodgy management.
It is difficult to see a posotive outcome for MUL, but I hope I am wrong, I have been many times before.
- Joined
- 12 January 2005
- Posts
- 315
- Reactions
- 0
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
This is from www.smh.com.au
Ex-Multiemedia director pleads guilty
March 22, 2005 - 5:34PM
A former director of internet and technology group Multiemedia has pleaded guilty to 25 charges of failing to notify the Australian Stock Exchange of trading in the company's shares.
Clinton Henry Starr, who was a Multiemedia director from November 2002 to November 2004, was fined $7,500 and ordered to pay costs of $6,000 after he pleaded guilty to the charges, brought by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), in the Melbourne Magistrate's Court on Monday.
In a statement, ASIC said that Starr had sold 28.75 million Multiemedia shares and acquired 10.05 million shares between December 2002 and November 2003 without notifying the ASX.
Starr pleaded guilty to 22 charges of failing to notify the exchange of a change of director's interest in the company within 14 days and three charges of failing to notify the ASX of a change in his substantial holding within two business days.
ASIC deputy executive director of enforcement Mark Steward said it was important that directors uphold their responsibilities to ensure market transparency.
Advertisement
Advertisement"Information about a director's holdings must be up-to-date and when these holdings change, investors must be able to understand the nature of the change," Mr Steward said.
"ASIC will prosecute directors who flout their obligations."
Starr, of Brighton East, Victoria, left the board of Multiemedia in November last year to concentrate on a new environmental/organic venture called Green Planet Holdings.
© 2005 AAP
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Business...-pleads-guiltys/2005/03/22/1111254016241.html
This is from www.smh.com.au
Ex-Multiemedia director pleads guilty
March 22, 2005 - 5:34PM
A former director of internet and technology group Multiemedia has pleaded guilty to 25 charges of failing to notify the Australian Stock Exchange of trading in the company's shares.
Clinton Henry Starr, who was a Multiemedia director from November 2002 to November 2004, was fined $7,500 and ordered to pay costs of $6,000 after he pleaded guilty to the charges, brought by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), in the Melbourne Magistrate's Court on Monday.
In a statement, ASIC said that Starr had sold 28.75 million Multiemedia shares and acquired 10.05 million shares between December 2002 and November 2003 without notifying the ASX.
Starr pleaded guilty to 22 charges of failing to notify the exchange of a change of director's interest in the company within 14 days and three charges of failing to notify the ASX of a change in his substantial holding within two business days.
ASIC deputy executive director of enforcement Mark Steward said it was important that directors uphold their responsibilities to ensure market transparency.
Advertisement
Advertisement"Information about a director's holdings must be up-to-date and when these holdings change, investors must be able to understand the nature of the change," Mr Steward said.
"ASIC will prosecute directors who flout their obligations."
Starr, of Brighton East, Victoria, left the board of Multiemedia in November last year to concentrate on a new environmental/organic venture called Green Planet Holdings.
© 2005 AAP
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Business...-pleads-guiltys/2005/03/22/1111254016241.html
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
Nice, thats going to go down well tommorow....
NOT!!
What anoys me the most, is that when I sell, I know the price will go up!
The company has potential to make a bucketload. If it does or not is upto the management, and judgeing from the last post, I cant say im happy with them.
Nice, thats going to go down well tommorow....
NOT!!
What anoys me the most, is that when I sell, I know the price will go up!
The company has potential to make a bucketload. If it does or not is upto the management, and judgeing from the last post, I cant say im happy with them.
Porper
Ralph Nelson Elliott
- Joined
- 11 August 2004
- Posts
- 1,413
- Reactions
- 274
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
Oh, well that didn't take long, please remove the "allegedly" out of my previous post (above). :behead:
Porper said:.Enough shares on issue to fill China, then of course the allegedly extremely dodgy management.
.
Oh, well that didn't take long, please remove the "allegedly" out of my previous post (above). :behead:
ghotib
THIMKER
- Joined
- 30 July 2004
- Posts
- 1,057
- Reactions
- 88
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
Not that I'm trying to defend MUL management from bad joke status, but Starr is an EX-director so he has no current, direct, apparent influence on the company. Which sort of means that there's no logical reason for his conviction for past offences to affect the price.
Has logic ever had anything to do with MUL share price??? (no answer required)
Not that I'm trying to defend MUL management from bad joke status, but Starr is an EX-director so he has no current, direct, apparent influence on the company. Which sort of means that there's no logical reason for his conviction for past offences to affect the price.
Has logic ever had anything to do with MUL share price??? (no answer required)
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
Management has advised the shareholders. The half yearly results included as a contingent liability
"Switchcorp A claim for unspecified damages relating to the termination of the proposed acquisition of Switchcorp by Mul in 2003 was lodged during the Year ended 30 June 2004. The quantum of the claim has yet to be determined. The company has denied liability and the directors are of the opinion that no loss will be incurred."
Mul originally announced in Nov 2002 "that it had agreed the terms of agreement to acquire to secure 51% OF Swithcorp following a capital raising in this proposed subsidiary. Mul did not anticipate it would require to raise additional capital in Multimedia to achieve this result".
What is interesting about Switchcorp is that the company was only registered on 27 August 2002, still has share capital of $7,600 and one of the two directors is a Mathew STARR (I'm guessing a brother of Clinton).
There is no evidence that the company has ever traded, it is not listed in the White or Yellow Pages. I can also find no mention of the size of the claim or the basis, however if it is true that it is $46.0m, it would obviously be an ambit claim, with MUL only having net equity of $9.4m as 31/12/2004.
Management has advised the shareholders. The half yearly results included as a contingent liability
"Switchcorp A claim for unspecified damages relating to the termination of the proposed acquisition of Switchcorp by Mul in 2003 was lodged during the Year ended 30 June 2004. The quantum of the claim has yet to be determined. The company has denied liability and the directors are of the opinion that no loss will be incurred."
Mul originally announced in Nov 2002 "that it had agreed the terms of agreement to acquire to secure 51% OF Swithcorp following a capital raising in this proposed subsidiary. Mul did not anticipate it would require to raise additional capital in Multimedia to achieve this result".
What is interesting about Switchcorp is that the company was only registered on 27 August 2002, still has share capital of $7,600 and one of the two directors is a Mathew STARR (I'm guessing a brother of Clinton).
There is no evidence that the company has ever traded, it is not listed in the White or Yellow Pages. I can also find no mention of the size of the claim or the basis, however if it is true that it is $46.0m, it would obviously be an ambit claim, with MUL only having net equity of $9.4m as 31/12/2004.
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
Not an employee, but someone who has a considerable investment in MUL and someone looking to justify this level of investment in face of declining share price and a lot of negative sentiment in the various forums.
This investment in Mul I have built up as a result of attending every meeting of the company for the last two years and doing my own research into both the industry, the companies they are partnering and dealing with.
Obviously when I read such an alarmist posting as yours I want to do further research. All the information mentioned in my posting is publically available on the internet, ASX website and company searches.
I am very interested in the MUL Executive who is meant to be an undischarged bankrupt, as you probably know undischarge bankrupts are unable by law to be a director of Australian companies, so it must be someone else other than Walker, Ballantine or Ellison.
Also you would be aware that directors by law are obliged to keep the market informed of all developments that may effect the company. This includes such matters as what is suggested by yourself.
They also to have to advise the ASX, if they believe they are unlikely to meet forecasts, etc. Management now has the benefit of some 3 months of sales data, cash flows since 30/12/04 and would have sufficient knowledge whether they are unlikely to meet their only forecasts they have provided to the market (at least the possibility of generating a $2.9m profit in the second half).
If you have ever attended a meeting and listened to the CEO, John Walker read his CV or were aware of his other corporate duties, you would probably come to the same conclusion as me that he would be unlikely to jeopardise his reputation or standing by breaking his legal duties as a director of Mul.
Particularly in light of the legal action now being taken against Adler, Williams and so on.
However, iin the event f you have any information or proof to the contrary I suggest it is your duty to protect MUL investors by making a formal complaint to ASIC, so the appropriate action can be taken against the directors.
Not an employee, but someone who has a considerable investment in MUL and someone looking to justify this level of investment in face of declining share price and a lot of negative sentiment in the various forums.
This investment in Mul I have built up as a result of attending every meeting of the company for the last two years and doing my own research into both the industry, the companies they are partnering and dealing with.
Obviously when I read such an alarmist posting as yours I want to do further research. All the information mentioned in my posting is publically available on the internet, ASX website and company searches.
I am very interested in the MUL Executive who is meant to be an undischarged bankrupt, as you probably know undischarge bankrupts are unable by law to be a director of Australian companies, so it must be someone else other than Walker, Ballantine or Ellison.
Also you would be aware that directors by law are obliged to keep the market informed of all developments that may effect the company. This includes such matters as what is suggested by yourself.
They also to have to advise the ASX, if they believe they are unlikely to meet forecasts, etc. Management now has the benefit of some 3 months of sales data, cash flows since 30/12/04 and would have sufficient knowledge whether they are unlikely to meet their only forecasts they have provided to the market (at least the possibility of generating a $2.9m profit in the second half).
If you have ever attended a meeting and listened to the CEO, John Walker read his CV or were aware of his other corporate duties, you would probably come to the same conclusion as me that he would be unlikely to jeopardise his reputation or standing by breaking his legal duties as a director of Mul.
Particularly in light of the legal action now being taken against Adler, Williams and so on.
However, iin the event f you have any information or proof to the contrary I suggest it is your duty to protect MUL investors by making a formal complaint to ASIC, so the appropriate action can be taken against the directors.
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
Wow this is a bit different from what you said in your post of September last year.
Where you said.
"yeh team, i think that the next support level at 1.2 cents probably looks good because someone told me that they were doing jury duty at the Supreme Court a few weeks ago and they saw MUL's name on the Case Lists for that day. They said that some crowd are suing MUL for heaps as the case is in the big dollar List.
Apparently the case has been going on for months - those in the know must be rescuing their investment by bailing-out quick.
I haven't heard anything from MUL about this as I've been away on business - has anyone else heard about it? I went to the General Meeting but no one said anything about it there.
Can anyone raise some light on this as it seems certain investors are aware and the rest aren't?"
Wow this is a bit different from what you said in your post of September last year.
Where you said.
"yeh team, i think that the next support level at 1.2 cents probably looks good because someone told me that they were doing jury duty at the Supreme Court a few weeks ago and they saw MUL's name on the Case Lists for that day. They said that some crowd are suing MUL for heaps as the case is in the big dollar List.
Apparently the case has been going on for months - those in the know must be rescuing their investment by bailing-out quick.
I haven't heard anything from MUL about this as I've been away on business - has anyone else heard about it? I went to the General Meeting but no one said anything about it there.
Can anyone raise some light on this as it seems certain investors are aware and the rest aren't?"
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
Ah u300314, you're playing with dates now and trying to infer that which is not.
In Sept'04 I advised 1.2 cents looked promising when others were talking 3+cents for MUL shares - it's getting closer to that every day.
I didn't learn of the $46+m claim until well after this time and have been patiently waiting for MUL to advise the shareholders accordingly - something they have continually failed to do.
Also, the CEO is Ballintine and not Walker and neither of their CVs are very impressive as evidenced by the woeful state of affairs at MUL.
You should also check the Magistrate Court's lists as MUL have/have had lots of cases pending where they're chasing up lots of debtors who don't seem to want to pay them. If your money is at risk u300314 I suggest you work MUCH harder to learn the TERRIBLE facts.
Happy Easter to all MUL traders and best wishes for the Easter calm before the Perfect Storm.
Ah u300314, you're playing with dates now and trying to infer that which is not.
In Sept'04 I advised 1.2 cents looked promising when others were talking 3+cents for MUL shares - it's getting closer to that every day.
I didn't learn of the $46+m claim until well after this time and have been patiently waiting for MUL to advise the shareholders accordingly - something they have continually failed to do.
Also, the CEO is Ballintine and not Walker and neither of their CVs are very impressive as evidenced by the woeful state of affairs at MUL.
You should also check the Magistrate Court's lists as MUL have/have had lots of cases pending where they're chasing up lots of debtors who don't seem to want to pay them. If your money is at risk u300314 I suggest you work MUCH harder to learn the TERRIBLE facts.
Happy Easter to all MUL traders and best wishes for the Easter calm before the Perfect Storm.
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
Sorry Lecent I meant Chairman, ie the person responsible for hiring and firing the CEO.
I have a number of questions and issues with your original post, re.$46m action and our last post.
Firstly I can't agree with your comments on Walker - since he joined in 2001, Mul has gone in a completing new direction. It now has in my opinion a viable product, in what is the biggest growth area of telecommunications (independant forecasts for the industry of 600 - 700 % pa over the next 2-3 years), the company with no debt and they maintain there on line to becoming profitable from herein.
Albeit that has been achieved with some large losses (arguable whether this not unexpected for what is a start-up venture - refer Optus, Foxtel, etc) and a lanquishing share price. I agree Ballantine is questionable, he obviously has strong marketing and other abilities, but I would not be a long term investor in MUL if Walker was not there.
With regard to the number of Magistrates cases where Mul is chasing debtors the audited accounts for 30/6/04 and 31/12/04 did not disclose any bad debt and only nominal provisions for doubtful debts. As you would know the collectability of debtors is the first think an auditor looks at. However, I would appreciate if you provide the details of any claims you have factual info on, so we can make an informed decision on whether this a normal business dealing or an indication that MUL has an inferior product/real debt collection problems.
I would also be grateful if you could provide answers to the following to assist readers of this Forum to make informed decisions and confirm your creditabilty regarding the "impending storm":
1. Who is the undischarged bankrupt executive at MUL
2. Exactly when and where were you advised by the former Mul employee of the $46.0m claim.
3. Who or what position did the former employee hold.
4. The basis for the claim if known and why is it only now you have posted the details on the forum
5. The name of the idiot investor who has $2.0m to throw away - I've got a few investments for him that he may be interested in.
6. The name of the Lawyers who advised you that Ballintine is on indefinite sick leave.
7. Whether you are going to lodge a formal complaint with ASIC and the ASX about the matter
thanks.
Sorry Lecent I meant Chairman, ie the person responsible for hiring and firing the CEO.
I have a number of questions and issues with your original post, re.$46m action and our last post.
Firstly I can't agree with your comments on Walker - since he joined in 2001, Mul has gone in a completing new direction. It now has in my opinion a viable product, in what is the biggest growth area of telecommunications (independant forecasts for the industry of 600 - 700 % pa over the next 2-3 years), the company with no debt and they maintain there on line to becoming profitable from herein.
Albeit that has been achieved with some large losses (arguable whether this not unexpected for what is a start-up venture - refer Optus, Foxtel, etc) and a lanquishing share price. I agree Ballantine is questionable, he obviously has strong marketing and other abilities, but I would not be a long term investor in MUL if Walker was not there.
With regard to the number of Magistrates cases where Mul is chasing debtors the audited accounts for 30/6/04 and 31/12/04 did not disclose any bad debt and only nominal provisions for doubtful debts. As you would know the collectability of debtors is the first think an auditor looks at. However, I would appreciate if you provide the details of any claims you have factual info on, so we can make an informed decision on whether this a normal business dealing or an indication that MUL has an inferior product/real debt collection problems.
I would also be grateful if you could provide answers to the following to assist readers of this Forum to make informed decisions and confirm your creditabilty regarding the "impending storm":
1. Who is the undischarged bankrupt executive at MUL
2. Exactly when and where were you advised by the former Mul employee of the $46.0m claim.
3. Who or what position did the former employee hold.
4. The basis for the claim if known and why is it only now you have posted the details on the forum
5. The name of the idiot investor who has $2.0m to throw away - I've got a few investments for him that he may be interested in.
6. The name of the Lawyers who advised you that Ballintine is on indefinite sick leave.
7. Whether you are going to lodge a formal complaint with ASIC and the ASX about the matter
thanks.
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
u300314 your questions can all be answered by MUL themselves as I've previously advised.
That's why I've provided the facts - for shareholders to question the company personally by phoning. writing, emailing the public officers of the company and getting/confirming the information.
As a shareholder I can do no more than provide the facts to my fellow shareholders to confirm and make their own informed decisions. All the details provided are correct.
You're suspiciously asking the wrong person for verification - why aren't you asking MUL's directors or management these questions - they're the ones who're looking after your investment - not me.
At NO POINT in your replies have you advised that you've questioned the company on ANYTHING, and being a new forum member of only 2 weeks standing, it appears you are closely associated with MUL - damming.
You'll need to do MUCH better me thinks. :goodnight
MULs Supreme Court Trial date: 3 October 2005
Claim Amount Against MUL: $46+m
Has MUL advised the Shareholders of these FACTS: NO
u300314 your questions can all be answered by MUL themselves as I've previously advised.
That's why I've provided the facts - for shareholders to question the company personally by phoning. writing, emailing the public officers of the company and getting/confirming the information.
As a shareholder I can do no more than provide the facts to my fellow shareholders to confirm and make their own informed decisions. All the details provided are correct.
You're suspiciously asking the wrong person for verification - why aren't you asking MUL's directors or management these questions - they're the ones who're looking after your investment - not me.
At NO POINT in your replies have you advised that you've questioned the company on ANYTHING, and being a new forum member of only 2 weeks standing, it appears you are closely associated with MUL - damming.
You'll need to do MUCH better me thinks. :goodnight
MULs Supreme Court Trial date: 3 October 2005
Claim Amount Against MUL: $46+m
Has MUL advised the Shareholders of these FACTS: NO
Re: MUL - Where to from here?
hi lescent
as per your above quote and the nature of your previous threads i cannot understand why you are still a shareholder of mul.
surely you would have exited by now as you are advising everyone else to do.
as it reads`to me there seems to be a strange contradiction here.
perhaps you can really tell us all exactly where you sit.
regards croc
lescent said:
hi lescent
as per your above quote and the nature of your previous threads i cannot understand why you are still a shareholder of mul.
surely you would have exited by now as you are advising everyone else to do.
as it reads`to me there seems to be a strange contradiction here.
perhaps you can really tell us all exactly where you sit.
regards croc
- Status
