Jump to content



Recommended Posts

pretty hard to exit a stock when its been suspended for 7 weeks..


I was not referring to the last 7 weeks but yrs, you are have been well aware of Sla performance and management history over a period of yrs. You surely cannot justify retaining holdings until this stage, but having allowed yourself to get into this present stage it's too late for any action. Yes by all means demand answers of management as is your right but you will not get the answers your looking for. There was a time when demanding answers and taking action if not forthcoming would have allowed shareholders to evaluate there continued holding, none bothered they just complained on this site. As for myself the history and actions of some managements tell me much more than a carefully worded reply. No one bad investment decision does not condemn a shareholder to be viewed as having absurd opinions but to continue to ignore or support a bad investment in the face of all obvious indicators is absurd. Your frustration I can understand and can even make allowances for but try directing them at the real source. If this stock ever comes out of suspension I predict it will be trading at 0.001 within minutes and who will be to blame for that, probably me for stating the obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 43.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • chiller


  • diana


  • Livas1


  • jezzabot


Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Agreed, however I would be concerned at the end of the day when the company is dissolved that those patent's were found to have been acquired or otherwise find there way under the control of a former director or associate without all due scrutiny


Thats right. That is the risk a punter is taking with this company. Nothing to do with accountants, auditors, regulatory risk and the enforcers of it or anything else. It all comes down to the people who have their hands on the levers.


Such a thing has happened with many other companies to date. That SLA is still standing, kind of anyway, would suggest this won't happen because it would've been done by now. However, that doesn't mean it won't.


It comes back to that legislative definition of insolvent I put up the other day. Both sub clauses (i) and (ii) must be met of clause (a). I believe the assets, which are the patents and various contracts are in excess of their contingent liabilities. Depsite being compliant with (i) they are only compliant with (ii) if you ask their accountant. A transaction of some sort could easily change his or her opinion.


Thence the refusal to disclose the accounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advice Guru Bob. I think I will just crawl back under my rock and hope that one day I can become as wise, enlightened and bountiful with my knowledge as you. You set such a high standard though, most of us mere mortals really ought not aspire to achieving it.


In fact, I like you so much Sirob that I am going to vote for you to stay on the SLA island for life (you seem to enjoy it there at any rate).



Link to comment
Share on other sites

correct, missed that totally and a lesson to be learn't there, many pharmas attract a lot of attraction in the very early days and the potential can drive the share price to unrealistic levels, at that point the astute trader will exit with the profits before the long hard uncertain road towards market, for those long term investors who stay the rewards can be exceptional should the product become a commercial success but most end up worthless, Sla was but one of many before it to follow that pattern but exhibited more obvious indicators of the likely outcome than most.




Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great post Kahuna,


What goes on to commercial success is not necessarily representative of best practice. It has more to do with those who hold power, manipulating the variables via messaging that maintains status quo through ignorance and fear. (I am using ignorance to mean ignoring, not stupidity) (I am using fear as an acronym False Evidence Appearing Real)


One of the best examples of this was done by the emerging plastics industry in the 1930's with displacing hemp as a material that could be used for almost anything. Hemp is fast growing and ecologically sound. Industrial hemp contains miniscule levels of THC. The plastics industry created a scare campaign twisting the truth of the matter knowing that fear would do the rest. This strategy has caused untold damage to the planet, but because it is now no longer questioned and it is just a matter of counting the money for those who hold the power.


Bioeffective A is the best product in the market for those wishing to maintain optimal health because it acts foundationally. Gut, liver, blood, detox, ANS, CNS, PNS. However the public are educated around a 'cure.'


The interconnectedness of the internet is changing the way that we do business in the world rapidly, which means it is much more difficult to use deception as a means of holding power. Although lowest common denominator strategy still dominates.


SLA continues to morph in an attempt to gain market traction. The next phase in this amazing (I am using amazing based on its etymology of being caught in a maze) story will determine, whether highest common denominator can strike a blow in the market place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...