George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
How original
With regard to ore from Regua. If you look at the end of year RNS, June 2020, you will note it refers to awaiting trial licence being authorised. As they had not been an RNS on the matter I would say it’s still the case. Not anything to do with BOD decisions. I think they have tried to do the right thing, but, Covid and legislation in Portugal have been an impediment to implementation. However, on general reading on the subject, it seems due to Covid and changes to legislation in Portugal with subsequent bureaucratic changes this has generated general delays in mining licencing- and no I cannot be bothered to cite everything dyor. So no ore from Regua is most likely to be due to that as we are amongst others waiting licencing. If you do refer to my earlier link on the subject you will read that the Portuguese are keen to get mining running as it is a fair old revenue stream, so yes I have positive expectations on that matter. Also this would have implications for the Sao Martinho gold trial mine. Reading into this the trial mine status is actually an authorisation to mine for 5 years; de facto full mining, albeit requiring further licencing if expanding on the mined desiganated area.
When it comes to facts GUG you started by citing rainfall for a completely different region which had a location called la Parilla. Again pot, kettle, and black.
How many posts today for you, ( a not interested in investing person )?
I suppose you’re busy when you’re referring to the P in PE ratio standing for profit.
Or when you were calling GIT incorrect and then were proved wrong.
Yep you love a fact. ..........
GUG. Are categorically staying that the information in the RNS is a lie?
I don’t expect you to understand that the rules for commercial transport are different
“ - Road traffic at internal land borders is prohibited, regardless of the type of vehicle, with the exception of the international transport of goods, the transport of cross-border workers and the circulation of emergency vehicles and breakdown vehicles.”
Im not talking about going on holiday.........and I can find the pertinent information in English
Transport of Tungsten from Regua to LP is entirely possible. I know this because I pay attention.
Next ?
Safetyman, of course you are correct..
GUG is perfectly entitled to his own negative propaganda, but NOT his own facts.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwji_oionYjwAhUBonEKHYe4BloQFjAAegQIBBAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffloodlist.com%2Feurope%2Fspain-flash-floods-andalusia-murcia-march-2021&usg=AOvVaw3mKa5VeOa5OXoTsmOFLfVR
Have a good evening.
I have taken the trouble to look at the data, from what I can see rainfall figures on the link are for jan to jun, or for average months etc and I don’t think we are at the end of June yet.
When it comes to flooding it also depends how rain falls eg a years rain in one day causes problems in comparison to a little bit everyday.
Anyway keep up the efforts. Tremendous.
Mind you if you are certain the rain did not fall as stated in the RNS you should state that as a fact and surely challenge the RNS. Unless of course you are not confident on that being the truth or not.
GUG, there was nothing correct about your profit/earnings ratio.
And I don’t really care if your Spanish geography is pants. That’s normal.
Rain was obviously an issue. I knew that at the time because I take an interest in it.
For the troll who would like to be right, and said the borders between Spain and Portugal were open, this..
https://www.elperiodicoextremadura.com/internacional/2021/04/18/sanchez-costa-trataran-cierre-fronteras-48461117.html
I don’t expect you can understand Spanish, but you can use goggle translate.
Pecten. I get slightly erksome.
Please see below the weather for Merida
https://www.worldweatheronline.com/merida-weather-averages/extremadura/es.aspx
AS expected the trends are very similar. Rainfall of over 100mm is common place. I think were we talking about 200+mm that occurred in April 2018 that is probably a bit of a 1 off event. But over 100mm is nothing special.
K3VMC. I was responding to a question with what I believed the be pertinent data, Wrong place , but when researched further proved to be entirely correct. No misleading data. Crawl back under your stone
Pecten. No there was no apology as none has proven to be necessary.
So now that you have historical information that 100mm+ rainfall is regular for many years and is entirely normal. We can only assume that the excuse provided by WRES was just that an excuse. Its been raining in LP much longer than the mine has been there.
I love being correct.
Safetyman
“ I know you like to point out things, it’s just that your wrong sometimes, it’s almost like an agenda, I mean putting in effort to check rainfall ( incorrectly) for a mine that’s part of company you have no interest in. Funny old world. “
GUG is just trying a little too hard, that’s all. Youthful enthusiasm. Don’t be too hard on him. He’s still embarrassed that he thought P/E ratio was something to do with profit.
“Better for people to think you are a fool” etcetera.
coordinated- apologies, should read co-ordinates
The coordinated were appreciated
The misleading at best, rainfall data, not so
You get somewhat sensitive when proven wrong don't you - based on the style of your posts, I wouldn't have thought you quite so insecure
Pecten. I was trying to help you. Get your own numbers
Gug - is that an apology?
For your mistake, or are you just sorry that it was spotted?
So do you accept Trojans figures - in other words that the RNS was accurate?
Ah my bad. Feel free to provide data
GUG thanks for the rainfall figures for la Parilla in Castile and Leon, that’s actually near Valladolid- my daughter lived there for a bit with a guy called Arturo.
However, to get back on track- Wres’s mine at la Parilla is on a different region Extremadura which is further south and drier than the Castile region which is further north. Big country Spain.
I know you like to point out things, it’s just that your wrong sometimes, it’s almost like an agenda, I mean putting in effort to check rainfall ( incorrectly) for a mine that’s part of company you have no interest in. Funny old world.
By the way my daughter lives in Salamanca now that’s more south than Valladolid and dryer but not as far south as Merida which is dryer still.
No surprise to see that the rainfall is entirely normal.
https://www.worldweatheronline.com/la-parrilla-weather-averages/castilla-y-leon/es.aspx
Probably just another screwup or excuse.
39.0765° N, 6.0789° W
Has anyone got the coordinates for La Parillla?
A Google earth search with images over time would be interesting re the excess rainfall and the subsequent better weather?