has naibu been put in liquidation? has anyone heard anything from or about naibu's current position.s.
Re: Of Interest Interesting development.I doubt if Naibu or any of the other "China Frauds" actually ever had the business or cash balances claimed but action against UK parties who were involved in Naibu's IPO and business advice could be interesting as a number of these people were involved in other of the failed China based AIM listed businesses.
Re: YOUR NEWS hello gold and silver. many thanks for your update. i wonder how the cost of litigation to change directors and the currentdirectors pay is being found?
Of Interest 22nd June 2017 Naibu Global International Company plc (or "the Company" Press release Shareholder Update The Board of Naibu Global Investment Company Plc ("Naibu" or "the Company" wishes to update shareholders as follows. Since its last announcement on 10 December, 2016, the Board of Naibu, which now comprises Giles Elliott, David Thomas and Stephen Cheung (the "Board" or the "NEDs", has been pursuing a number of initiatives, which are detailed below. Numerous attempts have been made to contact Lin Huoyan and Lin Congdeng, who were the Chinese Executive Directors of the Company (the "Chinese Directors", without success. Neither individual has responded to any approach, and neither are traceable via any of the addresses which they have supplied to the Board in the past. Lin Huoyan has, however, responded to legal notices issued through a newspaper advertisement (see below), but he is effectively hiding his residential address from the Board, making it very difficult to serve him with legal documentation. Consequently, the Chinese Directors have now been removed from the Board of Naibu. In order to take control of Naibu's underlying businesses, the Board proceeded to initiate actions to take control of Naibu (H.K) International Investment Limited ("Naibu HK", the intermediate holding company and 100% subsidiary of Naibu, registered in Hong Kong and of Naibu China Limited ("Naibu China", the underlying Chinese subsidiary, registered in the People's Republic of China ("PRC" and 100% owned by Naibu HK. In February 2015, the Board passed a resolution removing Lin Huoyan, Lin Congdeng and Lin Zhenzhi (Lin Huoyan's sister and Lin Congdeng's wife) from the Board of Naibu HK and appointing the NEDs to the Board of Naibu HK. Chinese litigation In June 2015, as required under the laws of the PRC ("PRC Law", the NEDs, through Naibu HK, issued legal proceedings in China to remove Lin Huoyan, Lin Congdeng and Lin Zhenzhi, as directors of Naibu China. During the course of this litigation, representations were made to the Chinese Courts, by parties associated with Lin Huoyan, that Naibu HK no longer wished to proceed with the litigation on the basis that Lin Huoyan was now in control of Naibu HK. This assertion, however, was a result of Lin Huoyan, or parties associated with him, filing forged papers with the Hong Kong Companies Registry, purporting that the NEDs had resigned as directors from Naibu HK and Lin Huoyan had reappointed himself as a director of Naibu HK. As a result, and to correct the forged filings, the NEDs also initiated litigation in Hong Kong, the details of which are set out below. This litigation has in turn delayed the litigation in China. The Chinese Court has now ruled in favour of Naibu HK, and the Board is now taking steps to take full control of the Chinese subsidiary. Under PRC Law, the Court is required to give Lin Huoyan notice of this judgement, which they have done by newspaper advertisement, and Lin Huoyan is allowed a period in which to appeal. This period is now over, and the Board are now requesting that the Court issue an order for new Naibu China chops (official stamps) to be issued, and to put the changes to the officers of Naibu China into effect. Once this has been completed, the Board will approach Naibu China's bankers and other relevant authorities in China to obtain Naibu China's records and bank statements. This will enable the Board to determine what assets, if any, remain in Naibu China, and where the Company's cash has been spent. If the Board finds that the Chinese Directors, Lin Zhenzhi or other persons have defrauded the Company, they will pass the records to the Chinese police authorities. Once the Board has obtained full access to the records of Naibu China, it will also review the merits of bringing any legal action against the Chinese Directors, Lin Zhenzhi or other persons. D
IS THERE ANYONE THERE thanks jersey 3. have been away for a while just wondered. have to set againstother profits. such is life. s.
Re: anyone there Have heard nothing, just about given up.
anyone there any news re company, uk directors, chinese directors and anything else.
Sunday Times ST has an article today describing the "comedy" value of Naibu's announcements and questioning how much due diligence the NED's (specifically Giles Elliott) and Daniel Stewart did.I know the answer with regards to the NEDs and it is that they did absolutely zero DD and just took their fees and lent their names to the company but took close to no interest in its supposed operations or finances (and I know this because someone at Daniel Stewart told me).They really should be banned from being company directors because they (unwittingly, I'll accept) helped to facilitate a major fraud.
Re: Has Giles Elliot found ... Well, there does seem to have been a spate of (Chinese) firms listing on AIM that have simply fabricated accounts..... and then that have gone to certain lengths to cover the deception up (one of them, I forget which one, saw its British directors fly to China to view bank details of claimed cash deposits). Eventually it all comes crashing down. It is wrecking the market's credibility and is sad for the genuine China plays out there - such as Hutchinson China or West China Cement (now listen only in Hong Kong).It certainly wants looking into but I am starting to agree with OG - you take a bet on such a risky stock there is not that much sympathy in the world to go round. People are dying in Syria who I could care about instead. Why not buy a professional trust that invests in AIM: Miton microcap for instance? I didn't see them investing here - o-: Good luck with genuine investments..... this never was one of those.
Re: Has Giles Elliot found ... Interesting questions .Hope George Os has help sort this one out for you .Keep the pressure onGood luckAnd May
Has Giles Elliot found ... .... any of the [non existent] cash yet?Or his reputation?Or any semblance of his conscience?Silly questions really.
Kicked off AiM Booted out today.Disgraceful it has taken this long to reach this point. Once it was obvious it was a fraud it should have been booted out immediately, along with its Nomad.
Re: Nomad resigns This is a classic scandal and obviously one perpetrated by the exec directors but sharing the blame, in my view, are:the Non Execs - asleep at the wheel at best (and should be banned from being company directors)LSE/AiM - for allowing it to happenNomad Daniel Stewart - total bucket shop which should have been shut down a long time agoSimon Thompson of the IC - sucked in many small shareholders, relentlessly puffing Naibu when there were clear warnings it was a fraud and then just cut and run when the brown stuff began to hit the fan and now on the basis of having told people to sell claims it as some sort of success for himself.
Re: Nomad resigns "You don't think there is any cash or assets do you Orchard?"It barely matters. Under Chinese law those cash and assets can never leave the country. Which means, if I need to spell it out, shareholders never actually owned anything, whether it existed or not.
Gunn-ed Interesting letter in the FT today from JohnGunn (ex CEO of B&C amongst other claims to fame). I'm not sure Icompletely buy it - if an geezer like me can see (as I did) that allthese China AiM listings were likely to be frauds shouldn't a big multimillionaire businessman like him not have been able to do so but anywayhere's what he saysSir, As a meaningful shareholder and (smaller) loan-note holder inSorbic, I read Patti Waldmeirs article (Notebook, May 27) with greatinterest. This is indeed a terrible state of affairs, whereby the systemcreated to give reasonable protection to shareholders of Aim-listedcompanies has failed completely. The Aim arm of the London Stock Exchange has allowed so many flakyChinese companies, where corporate governance is seemingly an unknownconcept, to list in London. What information on Chinese executivesholding corporate seals and licences, and therefore total control overthe companies finances, was given by nominated advisers (nomads) andbrokers? Precious little I think.Is the lack of action (by the London Stock Exchange) on these manyscandals the result of brushing a problem under the carpet so as not toannoy the Chinese authorities or a fear of putting off further lucrativeChinese IPOs (with big fees for the LSE), or a combination of both?I have been pressing the company for some time to come clean on thisaffair. Now, with your assistance, it has. However, the biggest scandalis the complete lack of protection for shareholders under Aim rules atall stages in the life of such companies. Compensation from the LSE,nomads and brokers is surely due?John Gunn London W8, UK