Proposed Directors of Tirupati Graphite explain why they have requisitioned an GM. 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.
Well there we go . Play the old Manipulation card.
And pull Lemham Bros out lol. Lemham went thanks to Sub Prime, and to think we won't see a raft of US Banks repeat this is like believing Jim Cramer was only wrong once .
The Manipulation is the answering back on the threads created by others who are putting out a line - dangling the bait too see who will answer and promote their Thread with " **** offers ****". and there you go you keep posting what they want to push.
Does it really matter in a Nutshell not very much as the stock is suspended.
However there is clearly a poster here that seems to having nothing else to do sadly - and that is nothing to do with GCAT, you see it on many others, it could be for a variety of reasons . So I don't really fell it's appropriate to engage for them. Jersey Crew has rightly come on to post about the misrepentation of facts .
Even Warren Buffet took a hit on Paramount . Best not to stress over things that cannot be controlled imo.
If you are entering the Junior stock of Miners as Rick Rule said - If you aren't prepared for it to be down 50%, you aren't prepared - or something along theses lines. This isn't Newmont, Barrick or Wheaton . So expect a rocky road. However being full of rage and negative thoughts all day isn't helping anyone imo.
You were asked directly, why do you post just a full stop.
You haven't answered that.
If its to push down topics, then yes that is manipulating the board. That's not me being unkind, it would just be a truth.
I did say it might be because you don't know how to create topics correctly too.
If you are doing it to manipulate top topics, push down others, than I fail to see how you can throw stones at anyone else as your actions are no better.
And if you honestly think no company has gone under which had HNW individuals involved that I would suggest you do more research. I picked Lehman to give an example of how no one is to big to fail. I could easily have picked one of the thousand others. Sirus Minerals had HNW individuals involved. Did that stay afloat simply because of them? Nope.
On the subject of rage. I'm a very relaxed individual, I'm also one GCATs more positive posters, but I'm not ignorant to failures either.
If you were aiming your comment towards Bebeto, love them or hate them, they are always calm and chilled in their responses.
I have very different views to them but credit to them they are always polite and reasonsed in their debate, which shows intelligence to me, and thus, as adults, we can just converse without having to try to hide popular topics by posting full stop ones to fill the board, because we aren't dictators lol.
Really Zan?
We have had to suffer Bebeto all 2024. Constantly bashing this company every day which he used to say he had shares in post suspension, which if he does, he is doing his utmost to damage.
Bebeto: 'no one reads these boards, so it doesn't matter what i say as it wont change anything' no Bebeto. It does matter.
Sick of hearing from him. 'its a free world, i can do what i like here' no Bebeto, just leave us shareholders alone.
And just as things couldn't get any worse Legal Wolf turns up again to spread his cleverly balanced and reasoned poison, laying doubt at every turn, and pointing at things that only the company can answer, therefore, leaving the doubt hanging in the air...... go back to Helium 1 please Legal Wolf and all the high stakes madness going on over there.
Thank God for the positive souls on here.
Robbie has been dealt a tough hand. Let's support him.
He was set up with problems way back in the beginning when Jason Brewer promised us all 2000+ ounces a months in a matter of days....
The OCIM problem was all OCIM's doing, not Robbies. Landing that impossible to meet demand on Robbie at the last minute dropped him in the turd.
I have been a shareholder here since the beginning, and have bought more stock 20 times.
I believe we will be ok.
If we are not, then so be it. Robbie is working his butt off to make this right.
Yes we all want more communication. Yes its taking ages.
I am very encouraged by the more recent investment of 750k by a very well informed investor that i assume is here to make some serious cash. You don't put that kind of money in without careful consideration.
We are only a 6 million market cap.
People say a blood bath when it relists.
That's rubbish. What will it be? 6 million down to 2 million on the first day, then back again?
I hope so, as i will hoover up more stock as it will be a 10 bagger in the making with these gold prices and an asset that is huge in such a brilliant jurisdiction. It may (sellers getting much needed cash out for personal reasons perhaps) drop, and then bounce back big time if Robbie gets his ducks in a row, which, with these gold prices i am sure he will.....
And there we have it, you don't want to read my views and you don't want to filter me because you want to take issue with my views.
So most likely using several avatars within the process.
I'm sorry I can't help you there as the issue is obviously on your side and not mine.
Zan - these comments are really childish imo, you accused me of manipulation, and now of being a dictator .
Really . The only time I see the other poster you mention is before I log in. Rather than misquote - I really mean that someone seems really really aggigated that the same post thread is not repeated ( a negative one) . So oh dear someone has a different view - how on earth does that work in a dictatorship lol.
I fully concur with what SomersetUK has just posted.
I wish you all the best in your investmentments Zan . There is not point arguing with each other through a suspension .
No one is going anywhere. Bebeto has already told you what to do if you don't like a poster or their posts. Either you debate them back, which is what BB are for, or you hit the filter button and remain in blissful ignorance.
I'm surprised people are getting so worked up about postings on here because the share is currently suspended. This is exactly the time to air it all out, good or bad.
If the company goes under, that is directly RM's fault because he's the one who has been in the driving seat, making all the decisions. To say that it's not his fault, because OCIM walked away last minute, is a big cop out. OCIM (even if you do believe the yarn) had nothing to do with wasting precious funds on TZ assets (that GCAT can't now progress), or promising non dilution and then diluting away in the background without telling the market. He's lost a lot of trust and credibility, and that harms all shareholders, even those that support him, and hence you investment.
Anyway, very little of this matters until or unless the company gets relisted.
Folio,
Its just my belief, that's all. I don't think it is childish to suggest that someone posting full stops as a topic, to hide others views is manipulation. I feel that is factual.
The dictator comment was a joke in jest really as trying to control free speach and other users viewing options feel very bb dictator like.
That's my take on those actions. Its not argueing and on a personal level I have no desire to make you feel unhappy but it doesn't mean I agree.
Somerset, yes really. I've learn't more from those who have different views to me than from those that have the same. Legal which you referenced, might have a more empty glass than me but is prob one of the most switched on knowledge wise investors Ive seen across the boards.
Echo chambers full of yes men are to me more dangerous as they can blind you from the truth.
Some prefer confirmation bais as it feels nicer and I get that. As always, each to their own.
Legalwolf - I see your stance is that failure would be totally down to Robbie. Presumably then success would also be totally down to Robbie?
As a general rule, JC, yes. That's how business works.
Sitting at the top isn't fun. You get the plaudits when it goes well and the pelters when it doesn't.
What I don't understand is your insistence on the opposite - it's never down to poor old Robbie. It's a confusing stance, unless of course you're very close to him (or even are him). The complete absence of balance is odd.
FWIW, I think he's done 'alright'. Four out of Ten. I've seen worse but I've also seen better.
Daniel - I have been watching this company intently for the last couple of years - every move, every interview and every RNS. I have applied my limited knowledge around mining and my wider knowledge about finance and corporate activity. I have tried to be balanced. When you say I have been completely absent of balance I think you are wrong - my view. The reason you might perceive that is I spend the majority of time correcting posters such as yourself who come out with opinion guised as facts and where you are simply wrong. I try and add balance and context and in the face of unsupported negative statements, then of course I can see how some of my posts in isolation will come over as you describe.
I have never hidden my enthusiasm for this company and whether you like it or not, we were on a path for success when OCIM walked - and they did walk despite the claims here of negligence on GCAT's part. The strategy has always required expansion and expansion has always required funding of some sort. Robbie and GCAT have been rolling the ball up hill ever since in an effort to attract more investors in an incredibly difficult environment to attract funds - especially into an African country where a big investor has walked - leaving suspicion in its wake as to why. Robbie has kept the lights on and even managed to move forward in many areas and on a shoe string hand to mouth budget as he has regrouped and tried to bring the ship back on course. I really don't think most of the posters here actually understand a fraction of what it takes to run a business let alone a mining operation, with health and safety considerations, the logistics of running old plant and machinery, the vagrancies of down times in electric power due to widespread country power issues, the requirements that go with being a fully listed company, attracting the right calibre personnel - the list goes on. The likes of you Daniel show no understanding of what it takes to run any kind of business - you just pontificate about how easy it must be to come up with a set of accounts.
I disagree by the way about whether success or failure will be down to one man. Yes the top person is normally held accountable but it takes a team to succeed and we know that Robbie is running an incredibly lean managerial team, so maybe in this instance when it is turned around, Robbie will be largely responsible but not fully. Just in the same way if it fails it will not be all his fault. From my business experience there is rarely black and white in these things.
What do I think was Robbie's greatest error - putting too much faith in OCIM and communicating that trust and confidence to shareholders before the deal was done. He hasn't recovered from that in many eyes since but I think he has learned hs lesson and precisely why we aren't getting any feedback at the moment of detail on funding being put together in anticipation of the audit being released. Just my view.
I know the question wasn't to me JC, but I'd say yes.
Failure or success is always, as it should be imo, accounted for by the CEO.
As it stands, GCAT is still breathing and so I think it would be jumping the gun to say its a total failure. That, somewhat sadly, can only ever be stated once the ship has sailed and the companies been wrapped up.
Very carrot and the stick, but thats the situation. Robbie can still become a roaring success here as its not over yet.
As an extra note, as shareholders we view the SP as the measure of success, naturally of course as thats are balance sheet, but as the CEO its not the only thing that matters.
Thanks Zan
In theory you are right (in my view) - in practice it is rarely that clearcut.
I have years of experience dealing with distressed businesses and success is often down to hard work and luck and failure most often because of bad combination of circumstances that were difficult to foresee or plan for.
Take all those businesses that failed in Covid for example - the bosses fault?
Take those businesses that are heavily reliant on a main customer as so many are in light manufacturing for example - main customer goes bust and often brings down others with it - its' not alway possible to diversify your customer base especially if you are in a specialised market. Bosses fault? Perhaps to a degree but you need to understand the particular issues to make that judgement.
So accountability might stop at the top but its not always black and white when it comes to blame or cause and that is where people get confused here at times in my view.
Those distressed businesses who make it through to the other side do it because of hard work, adapting to changed circumstances, prudent cost control and trying to keep stake holders engaged and on board. As investors we are important stakeholders but there are many others who can have a quicker and more damaging impact if they are not on board - suppliers not giving credit terms and going to COD / regulators removing licences for health and safety issues / work forces striking because of redundancies / Banks remanding credit lines - the list is endless.
But so many posters look at this through naive eyes thinking that businesses are ran in text book fashion and should run like Swiss trains. The real world rarely works that way from my experience and sh*t can and often does happen. Its how you deal with it the counts.
Good points clearly made JC.
I do understand that JC and as someone who set up and run a million pound, 30 employee business (success), plus had many which failed to over the years (failures), yes, its a team thing and luck is very important to, but I still think the accountability stops at the top.
As a leader regardless of blame, its your job to get things done, against whatever challenges you face, even if luck goes against you, which it will.
That doesn't mean there wont be underlying reasons behind things, or cause and effect cases, but as the leader, thats your job to deal with it.
Honestly, my own experience was staff attitudes and behaviours caused no end of challenges, and you could argue any failings weren't because I wasn't working hard, because I was, usually 7 days a week dawn till dusk, but because they had blagged a sick day after a night out, or not bothered doing paperwork etc, lost a contract due to not treating the customer right, but end of the day, I know that is how things go and as such its my job to solve, its my job to find new ways to motivate, train, even disipline, to ensure contracts are overseen better.
Its my job to keep everyone employed and make sure everyone can get paid at the end of each month. Thats my duty.
So while I do agree its not straight forward, I just don't believe excuses are allowed or where does it stop? It doesn't make Robbie a bad person, but you have to have someone at the top and they have to be accountable. Its why the big bucks go that way as it compensates the pressure etc.
Zan_TM - you have to look at the failures. What type they are, how serious they are, how frequent they are and their implications for the business. The man has allowed the company to end up in suspension TWICE and both times its been poor governance. This has put everything else in jeopardy, as the last RNS has made clear.
I'm sorry, but in what serious and successful business does the CEO survive with his credibility, reputation and job intact with this record of failure after failure, or going from one crisis to the next, destroying sentiment, plans and value in the business, and much else. All imo and dyor
And yes, if he manages to turn the sinking ship around and takes it to the promised glory, he will deserve all the credit for that as well and it will be a truly remarkable achievement from this juncture. I hope that happens, but it's looking bleak. It's not impossible if he is able to deliver a credible financing plan as part of any relisting, which I think will be essential to stop the share price from collapsing. POG is strong and so sentiment can be restored if there is credibility and substance to the financing of the business. Let's see what happens and GLA
You'll probably find on the mining side RM is much better but this type of company needs to be run by a money man, someone with a strong financial background who will make the right cost based decisions with realistic aspirations that the company could achieve.
RM really painted the company into a corner with Tanzania asset and now the best thing would be to monetize it ASAP.
Thanks Zan - I respect your posts and I think we are actually on the same page.
My personal opinion is that it sometimes difficult for investors here to draw distinctions between accountability and cause / effect and blame. As an entrepreneur you will fully understand the curve balls that commerce can throw at you. For me personally, GCAT and Robbie were thrown a massive curve ball when OCIM walked and we have talked about too much trust having been placed in OCIM which is clear I think. Lesson is nothing is certain until it's certain - contracts signed.
So to your point about responsibilities and Robbie has kept the lights on and continued to move forward on a shoe string cashflow. You will understand the adage in business of cash being king - the company has had a tight rope to walk and juggling cash to meet a number of challenges - old machinery that is being ran hard to produce cash beaks down / extraordinary costs of prospectus work (external advisers and lawyers) etc etc. As the leader Robbie I am sure has had to make tough priority calls on cashflow. If I were in his shoes and had very limited working capital, would I prioritise keeping production going or would I bolster a finance team so we could present a nice closing statement when the company collapses? I exaggerate for effect of course but I imagine the limited finance team would also have been involved in preparing the strategic business plan for potential investors as well as the ground work for the prospectus - lots of plates spinning.
As you rightly say - as leader it was Robbie's job to get on with it. Did he make the optimum calls at the optimum time - almost definitely not but hind site is wonderful. The main thing for me is that this company is still in existence - still producing gold - still moving forward although investors of course only see the shares in suspension.
Could Robbie have given more updates and more detail during the suspension? - possibly - would it have served any good? - I don't know frankly. Some will have appreciated the warts and all approach and others used the update to further bash the company.
You end your post on another interesting note - excuses. I think again this is a word that can be confused with reasons. But why isn't a valid reason or excuse if you want, not allowed? Few things are that clear cut in my view. Again I cite Covid as the most understandable of reasons or excuses. Allowed or not allowed? Its an interesting debating point.
Morning Legalwolf - for me I agree with you last post and whilst I fully understand why you would see things as bleak given the time in suspension, I have a far more optimistic outlook - no surprise there you cry!
In another post you talk about credibility and the CEO retaining his job - I take your point but you also have to realise that at this point in time, like it or not, Robbie is the driving force behind this company. In the short term quite frankly we need him to come through for us and it's very much in his own financial interest to deliver. Any new CEO stepping in would demand a salary we wouldn't afford and is unlikely to have the mature relationships with stakeholders which I think Robbie must have been leveraging on to keep the lights on here. At the moment he is in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons - that could change as you have alluded to if / when we come out of suspension and a financed plan is revealed.
I am personally very hopeful that all will be revealed in the next few weeks as soon as these auditors deliver.
With the current gold price of $2390 per oz, it's really bad form and wrong for the company to not give any gold sales figures in the last two updates.
They are nothing to do with the the audits we're waiting for and shareholders deserve to know the situation unless there are no gold sales figures to release?
I recall one poster saying, not that long ago, that the gold price was irrelevant to us. But I'm not going to call them out, in case they feel victimised.
Although I must be quick to add that I don't share that view and believe that the price of gold is the one bit of blood still pumping through our veins and is of critical importance. Hopefully we'll get an update on operations soon.
Not only is gold our life blood - the overwhelming commentary about the future probable direction (up!) of its price, simply adds to the business case and incentive for funding investment from 3rd parties.