Blencowe Resources: Aspiring to become one of the largest graphite producers in the world. Watch the video here.
I don't rubbish the majority of tripe on here, but this one is actually beyond satire. You've backtracked from a more full defense of SM, but you're left saying there is a possibility that the board have held back news (potentially illegally) to keep the share price low so that a banker they have brought on board can claim to be better at his job. Will you say, without embarrassment, that you think that's a possibility. Go on, please say that to everyone here.
It is adorable how you think an absence of precedent still allows for SM being right. Please read carefully what he said, and what I'm rubbishing: that the board of Solgold have deliberately suppressed the share price not to fill their nose bags. Not to make them more appealing for sale. But so that Maxit look like they've done a better job. Read that a few times and tell me, hand on heart, that that is exactly what you believe is happening here. If you don't, and you think it sounds crazy, you're with me.
I see you trying to move on Bozi. I get it. You can't defend SM's stupidity so you're now diverting. Nice one.
I think solg are probably preoccupied with trying to get themselves sold, at a guess. Very little news until the SR is released. But not (and I can believe I'm having to say this for the 10th time today!) NOT because the board are trying to keep the SP low to make Maxit look better!! Ha! Ffs... Don't be as thick as SM.
Just give me one link to one reputable source that says SM's crazy theory has happened even once, and I'll accept it's a possibility. Otherwise he's wrong and you've all jumped on me for calling him out.
Bozi
If there is no precedent, it's not happening here. Solg management might be a bit bumbling, but they are not risking prison to boost Maxit's bragging rights.
I'd describe solgold's management as poor- would you disagree?
I don't think solg management has a trick up it's sleeve to double the sp.
SM's statement is still total horsesh** . The board here are not keeping the SP down so that Maxit can claim to have done a better job.
Lovely stuff, Bozi, but still not what SM claimed. Maybe he can help you out (although he's probably realised how stupid he sounded and has gone to ground). Where is the suggestion that the Board of Mariana Resources withheld news to keep their share price low, so that the consultant financiers acting for them could claim to have done a better job? Reminder: that's SM's claim with respect to Solgold. That's what I take issue with. That's what you've been unable to substantiate. If you have evidence that any company ever, Mariana Resources included, has done this, then I'll congratulate SM on his clear insight. But if you can't, you have to conclude that I'm right and he was talking out of his a***
If it's not impossible, name another company where the sp has been held down deliberately by the company's own BoD in order to allow a banker they've instructed greater bragging rights. This was SMs claim, which is what I'm calling out.
With respect, that's not what SM described, is it?
Solg are not aiming for a management buy out, and SM claimed it was so that Maxit could claim victory, not a cheap buy out.
Agreed, Orthern, so SMs rubbish about BoD deliberate SP suppression is just as thick as it sounds.
Hang on, Bozi, wtf are you going on about?! In response to SMs wayward brain fart, I asked for a company where the board of directors has been shown to be holding down its own share price. Not to attract a bid. He suggested that they were keeping it down, by failing to release news about regionals, so that Maxit could claim they had done a better job, by getting a sale from a SP of 16p, rather than a 50% gain from 40p or similar. Which of the companies you have listed had a BoD that was keeping the sp low in order to flatter a banker? Because if none of them have been shown to have done that, you haven't answered my question, and SMs thoughtless point remains thick af: my original point.
Bozi, don't be thick on purpose, it is not becoming. I asked for a company that had deliberately suppressed it's share price in order to claim victory when they land a middling bid. Where's the evidence that any of these companies did this? I'll wait! But you'll never admit SMs original statement was horses***, will you?
SMs other point, which I was countering, was that there was a deliberate lack of news to keep the share price down so that Maxit could claim a 300% bid. Come on, join me in calling this out for the nonsense it was.
Bozi frantically google searching and, predictably, coming up with nothing.
As night follows day, another poster who doesn't like an opposing view has claimed I'm not invested. When will they get it through their skulls that one can be invested for the long term, but still be unimpressed by the current share price and believe there isn't an imminent bid? Just because it doesn't fit your hopeful mantra, does not mean I'm not invested. Swing and a miss, fool.
Dartfrog shares my view that a bid isn't imminent. I give it a day before one of the tiresome old farts on here claims he's just deramping.
Bozi
News about regionals is not connected to share price suppression. Think it through.
And all parties looking at solg know what other stakeholders paid for their share. So they won't be duped by a 'low starting price' like some kind of tempting ebay auction. That sort of psychology might work on individual purchases of goods, but it is not how takeovers work. Anyone looking to buy solg will have a serious of price points pre-discussed. An ideal price, and acceptable price, a high price they are willing to go to, and an amount their share holders couldn't tolerate. And any bidder would start low and build up, but you must realise no one thinks they are getting solg for 17p a share, so 17p or 30p it makes no odds. Maxit know this. Why don't you ask them if they are suppressing the share price to tempt in bidders?! Reference a single time a company has done this. Just one. Ever.
I'm waiting.
Ha, the answer of a man with no answer. Sorry to embarrass you, SM, but you seem fairly eloquent, so maybe just read and think about what you post. Then you won't make claims that sound ridiculous on reflection, such as 'the board are deliberately avoiding a so rise so as to get a bid from a lower starting point, to claim victory'. The board. The actual board of a company. Face palm.
Sounds logical, SM- the company are trying to keep the sp down so they can sell cheaper. Do you even read the crap you post?!?
They could put out a message like the one from ALL, but for one little spanner in the works: an RNS has to be factually accurate... So you can spin things however you like on this message board, including the frankly bizarre rubbish you've just sent, but the company can't put out an RNS saying there has been interest if there hasn't.
Agreed. Don't worry, most on here have posted before thinking before. No hard feelings :)
Excellent decision, Sean, I hope others follow your lead come September.
And I'm not waiting on any funds to be released. I'm as 'in' here as I'm ever going to be, I'm just not as far underwater as those desperate posters hoping someone reading this board will invest a pretty penny, jack up the share price and save their bacon!
Also, as an aside, I'd find it deeply, deeply weird if anyone on an anonymous message board DID hold me in as high esteem as I hold myself! Can you imagine how creepy that would be? Sends shivers. Think before you post stuff like that, chap- I assume you sent it before thinking about what you meant. That's quite common on here, seemingly! Atb
SharketMare: who first used the term 'intellectual honesty' in this thread. Don't jump on me for that when it didn't come from me. Use your eyes, then your brain.
And I'm not masquerading as anything? Should I litter my posts with colloquialisms and vocabulary that isn't fit for purpose, just so as to avoid your ire? Lol.
The point of my 3 questions this morning was to prove how utterly disingenuous it is for slug to tell other posters there will be a sale. There may be. There may not. It may be imminent, it may be distant. The difference between a guaranteed sale in the next few months and a long term investment is a lot more than semantics, poppet- it's the entire focus of this board almost every single day. Do keep up.
And as for Q3, once again, it's advisable for all posters to read back a bit before commenting. I was not the one to raise Q2/Q3 2023 this morning...
Anyway, I shouldn't bite when the same simpletons post the same rubbish each day. Red gonna Red (post fictional trades and make up a new CV every week), bubble gonna bubble (hype for Red and post nonsense about tiny trades in Canada), Slug gonna Slug (insist that a sale is just around the corner and repeat this every month it doesn't happen, then get banned for disgusting views or coding a repeating phrase when he's called out) and SM gonna SM (actually not sure of SM's MO...)
Intellectual honesty is exactly what I'm seeking, thanks J.Maria. If no poster tells another this will definitely sell, we have a state of honesty on the matter. Note that it was slug who stated to daKat that it would be sold, with no indication that this was just a hopeful opinion.
I think it will see eventually. The market, and other investors, definitely don't think it will be by Q3 though, ha!
I was reading this board and your vacuous, wishful ramblings long before Stackhigh first posted here. I'm not sure what 'bantered off the board' means but I didn't favour his arguments.
I'm only keen on posters giving a timeframe if they insist a sale is imminent. It's a failsafe way to either silence them, or force them to admit they are not completely certain that a sale will happen. Or, third option, they get desperate and start flailing. Which are you? Lol