Rainbow Rare Earths Phalaborwa project shaping up to be one of the lowest cost producers globally. 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.
Looks like its all kicking off on here I am sure it will all end one day one way or the other just be thankful we are still here to moan about the situation I am 81 and still hoping for a good return on my stupid investment.
Soss613 , to end up light at 81 or 87 makes us smile
when we fly in peace to heaven. Up there life is fair.
Take care.
If you are a member of FSHG then you would have received the following email, sent 8th May, 2021,
"Dear Fellow FRR Shareholders
….However, we know that the company continues to communicate with one of our members who also shares these messages with FSHG and the LSE BB (under the pseudonym of Looed).
You will recall we have previously circulated some of this messaging with our members by email or by validating the messages on the LSE BB.
The “comms chain” has sent another message which we would like to share with you. We agree with the shareholder that the source of the comms should not be revealed, though we are able to confirm with absolute confidence that the source is a key figure at the heart of the FRC organization.”
Since Day 1 of comms FSHG have been involved and receive full, unedited and unredacted copies of the in / out comms. That was the situation then, that is the situation now.
Good enough? Or did I fake the FSHG message as well.
All the information re verification etc. was right there in front of you had you bothered to take a second to look for it.
Don’t let ‘em get you down Looed.
You help keep the hopes alive for many here…
Looed, what FSHG emailed to us doesn't appear to be verification. Hopefully they've held these messages up to the most severe scrutiny - but I have no idea how. There must be light to be shed on that? Surely the good people here must be wondering how FSHG can be so sure? Knowing this could be immensely confidence boosting.
I'm not saying these messages are fraudulent at all, in fact, I have a theory that they are part of SN's legal strategy and therefore real. But I can't prove that they are real. Everything I've been provided is unverifiable from people I don't know who tell me about things only they have seen. That's not a good position to be. But then, neither is owning shares (if that's even the case now) in a delisted company so perhaps these messages are neither here nor there in the story of FRR.
Please don't think that the efforts of yourself and FSHG aren't appreciated. They very much are. But even you must think this situation where a chosen random shareholder receives company messages to distribute like a PR firm would to be totally nuts. You must surely do, because it is!
Ricardo2019 – you said “I'm not saying these messages are fraudulent at all, in fact, I have a theory that they are part of SN's legal strategy and therefore real. But I can't prove that they are real. Everything I've been provided is unverifiable from people I don't know who tell me about things only they have seen.” What a conundrum! So we will have to agree to disagree on the meaning of verification.
> So we will have to agree to disagree on the meaning of verification.
I'm not sure we disagree as such. I'm not saying there hasn't been verification - by someone. I'm saying that I (and I assume the vast majority of others here) haven't seen it. We've only been told about people I (and again I assume the majority of people here) don't know with unknown skills/experience doing verification via an unknown process to an unknown quality.
The difference between verification happening and being able to evidence that process is an important difference. We should clearly understand what we have (especially since we don't have a whole lot!). Whether people here then decide to rely on trust and hope is up to them.
Having been burnt by other AIM shennigans I've learnt the hard way not to do rely on anything but solid, verifiable facts. So please forgive me for pressing this issue, but I feel strongly that we here should have a clear and accurate understanding of what has been presented to us, and what hasn't. And on that note, if anything I've said above is inaccurate then I'm all ears. I am very much up for discussing any of this further.
Authors note.... :-) For the avoidance of any doubt by anyone else, I may be replying to Looed but that does mean that I expect, demand, or assume anything of Looed, or the FSHG come to that. They are volunteers doing their best to help us for which I will always be grateful.
Hi armoured_bear, I don't accept your attempt to gatekeep this discussion forum. If you don't wish to discuss a topic then simply move along.
And actually, I'm not ****ed off at all. I'm at peace with getting nothing back from FRR. BUT I'm quite enthused by recent events. Which is exactly the reason why I make the points I do. The more hopeful I get the more I'm trying to counterbalance that by re-appraising what we have. I don't care if you don't want to discuss that, but don't come along trying to be the big armchair internet warrior and tell me what to post. It's rude.
Speak for yourself mate. I care. The problem is: if the majority of shareholders continue to publicly express satisfaction with the current state of affairs, which they do by regularly approving messages asserting that the company’s best approach is to avoid all communication with shareholders, it validates that position and disincentivises reestablishing lines of communication.
Ricardo is right. Even when a company is subject to regulatory scrutiny, it can be difficult to determine the operations of a company and the motivations of directors. Every shareholder has to approach an investment with a huge dose of skepticism because money is constantly at risk. In this circumstance we have multitudes of evidence demonstrating that the company hasn’t historically worked in the best interest of shareholders and now we are expected to divine the company’s intentions from messages conveyed by an anonymous third party? Gimme a break.
We don’t even have anything to substantiate the claim, which has become accepted on this board without any evidence, that the company can’t communicate due to some unspecified legal threat.
I’ve never heard of anything like that before. I can’t even really think of a good reason why that might be the case. Any entity connected, or in conflict, with the company will be aware of the existence of shareholders and this board is public so all the ‘sleuthed’ information can be easily accessed.
I don’t have any answers about how to change the situation but it is clear the answer isn’t: every shareholders should independently try to establish a private link the company. This perpetuates an information asymmetry and neuters the advantage we have as a large engaged shareholder base.
Personally I don’t see any problem with drafting a letter undersigned by the hundreds (?) of active shareholders demanding a basic level of formal communication and presenting it to the company via the supposedly verified channel. The suggestion that by applying pressure on the company to reestablish communication could harm our prospects is strange, even suspicious, and there are plenty of reasons why it could be done for nefarious reasons.
Abkaz, I am only on lse board due to ii chat board being taken away many moons ago, great posters like t.o.t and devex , they always mentioned Looed’s finds on ii, now years have passed, these sterling chaps formed fshg group for us real holders to be part of. They and Looed have done as much as I can honestly see and truly believe anyone could have done, without involving lawyers etc.
now Looed has “clearly” stated this many times, crack on yourself and see how far you get? trust me it will get you no further than we are now, and only make your wallet or purse less heavy due to lawyers fees.
This is a board for frontera discussions, everyone has a right of opinion, but please crack on and let us know how you folks get on ?
For myself yet again, I am happy to sit and wait , there has been more info found, updates given and movement on company status than anything years gone by gave us. All positive in my eyes but not a given, I am fully aware as I have been for years this could be my hard earned savings gone.
In our leader I trust, it may come back and bite me, but gut and faith says otherwise.
Great post Devex and good to read your write up again.
GLA real holders
Abkaz - If you don't see the problem of the company opening up communication with shareholders, let me remind you of some of the past events.
In 2008 after FRR struck oil, Putin invaded Georgia.
SH/O twice tried to get control of the assets via liquidation.
The GD and BI have hampered the development of Block 12.
The GG have tried to take back Block 12 via arbitration.
Plus there's the geopolitics of the region to consider.
I know it's frustrating and I've even had to argue with Looed in the past about involving investigative journalism. Thankfully, Looed now can see the possible dangers of Frontera communicating too soon. The risk versus reward is just too far towards the former IMHO. Plus if we've been taken for a ride by SN and the board, what would be the benefit of finding out earlier, when the liquidator's, SH/O, Mourant and YA couldn't even get get a result. IMHO SN has too much to lose with his family reputation and links with the Atlantic Council. Plus I don't just think the lobbying resulted in members of the senate and congress representing FRR, but I also think some are possibly invested, as well as the rumours of CIA money. The political implications are too big for the company to have shafted shareholders IMHO, when the geopolitics are taken into account.
I agree Madp, the geopolitical situation is very high in SN's plans for getting full value for the asset.
Seriously do we need to be squabbling amongst ourselves it is what it is until it isnt. whether you are happy with the company dealing only with one guy or not at least he has the decency to let us know
i mean i wouldnt let you rabble know if it was me getting the info thats for sure 😂🤪😋
im more concerned about the introduction of aliens into the conversation, we really dont need to be talking about those that live in barrow like that
Just caught up with last two days posts , interesting .
Only thing I can add is
To me Looed is what “ Deep Throat “ was to Woodward & Bernstein, a much needed source and ally.
Oh….. I like that, a lot - well said.
ZZ tops, thank god you mentioned Bob & Carl in your write up, it could have been taken for a completely different “ deep throat “
GLA real holders