Member Info for A-s-h-t-o-n

I have decided to take a break from posting. Before I go I must make it clear that contrary to what some posters might think, I am not here to promote JAY. My posts have been a reflection of my unflinching and unshakeable belief in the promising assets of JAY, in particular, Disko and Kangerluarsuk (district-scale tenements). My hopes for JAY may or may not materialise and I know only too well that JAY being an early-stage mining explorer is a high-risk/high-reward play. Just like other shareholders, my objective is to hopefully get a decent return on my investment. Although there have been some serious setbacks recently (e.g. suspension of the Dundas project, lack of progress with Disko, etc.), I hope Eric Sondergaard (MD) and his team will progress the company with renewed vigour and reverse the abysmal share price performance he has inherited.

I am not blind to JAY’s weaknesses. For my part, I have conveyed to both the previous management and present management that there are two key areas of weaknesses where JAY can and should do better:

1. Management fulfills the expectations they raise.

2. Management provides timely and effective communication.

In terms of timely and effective communication, shareholders are waiting for answers to the following questions and updates on them:

1. What is the plan for progressing the Disko project?

2. Kangerluarsuk and Hammaslahti have now been deemed as strategic assets and are therefore not for sale. So, what are the plans for progressing the development of these two assets?

3. What are the plans for and the progress on the sale of Dundas, Thunderstone, Enonkoski and Outokumpu assets?

4. What does the recently announced "Expansion of Corporate Strategy" actually mean in practice and how will it create significant shareholder value?

5. How will JAY fund its business over the next two years?

I have conveyed to the present management the urgent need for answers to and updates on the above. I have also conveyed the urgent need for the maiden interview with ES. The interview is now well overdue given the fact that four months have passed since ES was appointed.

I am expecting some news updates pretty soon. They could come out within a matter of weeks or even days.

Finally, maybe my departure will bring a more balanced playing field for discussions about JAY.

Good luck shareholders and Goodbye!

Fair point, CC. The question was "More importantly, did that last RNS strike you as remotely credible, Ashton?" and the question could be interpreted in the way you have suggested. But equally, it could also be interpreted as a question of how credible it is to broaden the strategy to cover exploration into new areas such as helium, industrial gas and hydrocarbons. For example, (a) Does the company have sufficient experience to embark on this new field? (b) Where will the funds come from for pursuing this expanded strategy? and so on.

​It was a broad question open to different interpretations.

In the note you posted on 23 Apr 2024 at 14:43, you asked: "More importantly, did that last RNS (19 April 2024 - "Expansion of Corporate Strategy") strike you as remotely credible, Ashton?"

Sorry for not getting back to you sooner but I was hoping there would be further news on the "Expansion of Corporate Strategy" before replying. Anyway, here is my interim reply. The RNS said: "Our decision to consider opportunities in the helium, industrial gas and hydrocarbon space has come about through the identification of a number of very compelling, large-scale opportunities which the Company believes warrant further consideration. These potential opportunities align perfectly with our ultimate goal of creating significant shareholder value."

My comment: JAY says this opportunity would create significant shareholder value. I welcome that but JAY has not provided either any details of the opportunity or how it would provide significant shareholder value. I await further information from JAY before I can come to an informed view. Until then I am keeping an open mind. I am sorry, but that's the best reply I can give you at the moment. Anyway, when JAY has provided further details on the matter you should also, hopefully, be able to form an informed view - https://tinyurl.com/ye24up8j

That was a 422-word garbage about Ashton and his shareholding. Who cares?

If someone says that they are here only to trade the stock on spikes to make a profit, there is nothing wrong with that approach. But why would that same person keep bashing the stock to death? One cannot rule out a cunning and devious plan at play here. They want to create as much fear among shareholders, hoping they would sell, in an attempt to get the share price as low as possible to make a greater gain when the spike happens. We are all here for a reason, so beware!

Going back to the list of rudimentary lessons in investing:

Lesson No.1: Be very careful of bullish and bearish posters on chat boards.

Another rudimentary lesson.

4. If after doing (1), (2) and (3) you are CONVINCED that the company is a bad investment don't waste your time, move on. Why waste your energy on a lost cause or a situation that cannot be changed?

"I considered that you were an investor. Like JAY you assume the role of a pumper transvestite as investor with wishful thinking."

"I think I prefer a transparent, high blood pressure good person (a dumb altruistic in your sense) than a sarcastic con."

Oh dear, that was some outburst! It's not good for your blood pressure. Anyway here are a few helpful lessons to ponder over:

Lesson No.1: Never blame others for one's poor investment decisions.

Lesson No.2: If one is ​​CONVINCED that they have made ​a​ poor investment decision, the choice is there to sell up and move on. If one decides to still stay invested, stop moaning and groaning.

Lesson No.3: High blood pressure can cause serious health risks. Never get stressed over one's investment decisions. Health is more important than wealth.

Best to grow up and understand these home truths.

Calm down, Altruists. This is not good for your blood pressure.

IvRoche - Yes, you haven't missed much and what a waste of time all this noise​. By the way, we now have a Club of Altruists on this board and some have ​already and openly declared ​their membership. But I thought anonymity was the truest expression of altruism.

Getting back to JAY, look out for the RNS update on Disko. I have always said that at some point Disko will need a major mining company as a partner with or without KoBold.

ChirpyCheep - I think I am right in saying I have always answered questions put to me. But if I have a choice, I avoid engaging with people who resort to using abusive language at me. I do the same in my private life. For me, money is not everything but decent behaviour is. I am what I am.

Recently, I have noticed a clear divide on the chat board here. There are believers and non-believers in JAY. I can understand why believers spend time and effort posting about JAY. But I don't understand why non-believers (some are ultra-non-believers) spend time and effort posting about the stock if they have no belief in it whatsoever.

Among the non-believers, I have identified at least one poster who is an ex-employee of JAY but will not expose the person, at least not for the time being.

Just an early warning to believers and neutral observers of JAY that ulterior motives are at play here.

Enuff - LWHL commented: " Perhaps they have simply not had ANY interest, at any price, for these assets?"

I was simply responding to LWHL's comment of "not had ANY interest". On the contrary, there was interest from at least one potential buyer at the time I attended the General Meeting in February 2024. There is a danger we might be going around in circles here.

LWHL - You say: "I did not consider that point, enuff."

Since you have made the above comment regarding the information I obtained at the General Meeting, your comment deserves a reply.

It is not unusual for company directors to disclose information outside RNS releases in open forums (e.g. media interviews that can be accessed by the general public). There is nothing wrong with such disclosures as long as the information disclosed is NOT regarded as price-sensitive. For example, JAY has already informed the market via RNS releases that some of its assets are for sale. Information that follow-up sales discussions with potential buyers are taking place can't be regarded as price-sensitive because that is a natural progression after informing the market of asset sales. What would be price-sensitive is that if and when the sales talks result in an agreement that information must be disclosed via an RNS in the first instance.

In fact, in this YouTube video interview dated 30 January 2023, Rod McIllree talks about ongoing sales conversations with potential buyers (at 18:45 mins) - https://youtu.be/i_9UOExW7Wc?t=1

Are we trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here?

LWHL - I should have added this to my last note. Please take a look at the last paragraph of the note I posted on 6 Feb 2024 at 13:53 after attending the General Meeting the day before.

LWHL - You say: "Perhaps they have simply not had ANY interest, at any price, for these assets?"

Not so. There has been an interest from at least one party. I attended the General Meeting in February 2024 and came to find out from a member of the Board of Directors that a potential buyer from South Asia was engaged in talks with JAY about the sale of assets.

You say JAY has been talking "for a long time". I would not describe 4 months as a "long time" considering any potential buyer has to carry out thorough due diligence and also negotiate mutually agreeable terms. This can be a prolonged affair. Just because we are in a hurry does not mean the process can be hurried.

RNS 20 December 2023: "In due course, the new Board will update shareholders regarding the implementation of a new strategy that will focus SOLELY around developing the Disko magmatic massive sulphide project in Greenland."

RNS - 16 January 2024: "In December 2023, the Company announced the appointment of a new Managing Director, Eric Sondergaard and three new non-executive directors, Rod McIllree, Harry Ansell and Tory Whittaker. This new board are looking to implement a new strategy that will focus SOLEY around developing the Disko magmatic sulphide project in Greenland."

The conclusion from the above two news items is that the Disko project would be the sole focus for future development and the remaining assets would be sold off.

RNS - 19 April 2024: "Company has identified its strategic assets as follows; Disko - Nuussuaq, Dundas, Hammaslahti and Kangerluarsuk."

The conclusion from the above news item is that Disko, Dundas, Hammaslahti and Kangerluarsuk are now NOT for sale.

The overall conclusion:  The assets Disko, Dundas, Hammaslahti and Kangerluarsuk are NOT for sale. By deduction, the assets Dundas, Thunderstone, Enonkoski and Outokumpu are for sale.

JAY is yet to explain the reason for the change in the strategy for the sale of assets.

ChirpyCheep - I posted it simply because it contained information about Eric Sondergaard and nothing more.

You ask: "Isn’t Kobold a major miner?"

Major miners are companies like BHP, Vale, Rio Tinto, Anglo American etc. KoBold is primarily a mining explorer. It has not built a single mine and taken it to production, at least not yet. This might change if they take their Zambia copper project to production on their own.

LWHL - You say: "They presumably have been trying (for a long time now) to sell ALL the non-Disko assets."

Not ALL the non-Disko assets​ are for sale. Did you see the RNS on 19 April 2024?

ChirpyCheep - As for White Cliff Minerals, you ask: “Any relevance?”

"No" is my answer, not in the way you might be thinking.

Keep a lookout for the RNS on ​the Disko​ update. I have previously and repeatedly stated here that the Disko project will need a major miner at some point to progress and realise its full upside potential with or without KoBold.

Https://tinyurl.com/mr3jaen7