Member Info for ACKER

Radika

As if by magic,a classic example is posted.

Who presses the "sell" button.

I wouldn't be concerned,it's just a puddle in the road.

Acker

TT1981

I bet your mummy was so pleased with you now being able to read big words,well done.

Acker

Radika

Because people do not read the RNS,they are more inclined to read the posts about a 50% fall,bankruptcy etc.

Acker

Snowking

It's a walk in the park,riches around every corner one just has to have broad shoulders and give it time.

In my book all in going to plan,expecting one,maybe two RNS's as early as this week one about the EGM .

Today is just part of the transition,nothing more,nothing less.

Regards

Acker

Ferryboat

Was just thinking the same.

Have just purchased some.

Bodes well for a quick recovery.

Acker

Raaydaar

Thanks for the reply. I’m not interested in name‑calling or trading insults, so let me keep this straightforward. When I refer to “trolls”, I’m talking about behaviour, not viewpoints. There’s a clear difference between someone offering a balanced opinion and someone posting the same negative narrative day after day without any stake in the company. One is discussion, the other is disruption.

Yes, I’ve agreed with negative points in the past — and I still acknowledge the challenges. My view has changed because the information has changed. That’s how investing works. None of us are obliged to stay fixed to one position forever.

You’re right that timelines have slipped and the financial position is tight. Nobody is denying that. But equally, not every interpretation of events is as black‑and‑white as you present. There are moving parts behind the scenes that we simply don’t have visibility on yet, and that’s why opinions differ.

As for the “white knight” comment, I’ve never suggested anyone is riding in to save the day. What I’ve said consistently is that third‑party funding remains a possibility until it is formally ruled out. Friday’s RNS didn’t do that — it simply confirmed that shareholder support is still required in the meantime.

We can debate dilution, timelines, and strategy all day, but the reality is simple: shareholders will make their own decisions based on their own risk appetite. Nobody here needs policing, and nobody needs saving. Different viewpoints are welcome — constant derision from non‑holders is less helpful.

Where shareholder value comes from will be determined by what happens next, not by repeating the same arguments from last year. I’m choosing to stay constructive. Others are free to take a different path

Acker

Guly

The desperation from the trolls is becoming more obvious by the week. Their arguments are getting thinner, the recycled talking points are wearing out, and the fodder that kept them fed for months is disappearing fast. When the facts on the ground start shifting, the noise always gets louder — but volume isn’t strength. It’s just the last stage before the narrative collapses.

Acker

Raaydaar

You say nobody is policing the board, but the volume and intensity of posts from non‑holders tells a very different story. When people with no financial interest spend hours every day warning strangers how to spend their own money, it stops looking like “helpful advice” and starts looking like an agenda.

Everyone here understands the risks. Adults don’t need guardians. Some investors have lost money, some haven’t — that’s the nature of AIM. But using those examples as a justification for constant negativity doesn’t make the motive any clearer. If someone genuinely has no stake, no intention to buy, and no expectation of ever investing, it’s reasonable to ask why they remain so invested in telling others what to do.

Different viewpoints are fine — they’re part of the market — but let’s not pretend that relentless posting from non‑shareholders is some kind of public service. People can make their own decisions without being lectured by those who aren’t even in the stock.

Acker

Put it this way :

“It’s always the empty vessels and the cheap seats that try hardest to tell others how to play the game.”

Acker

Ballymena

Fair play,great reply.

What a waste of natural talet.

Leave the dark side,buy a few shares ,wait,and you to can bath in the success of Premier

Acker

Wow

I see the smear campaign is now in full flow,demanding "credibility statements" from shareholders .

One can almost taste their frustration that the company is shedding the historical errors and making true ,tangible progress.

Each week their case gets weaker and weaker,feel quite sad for them.

They fooled a lot of shareholder at the end of last year,still crying "wolf"

Acker

Well,this is how I see it.

If you believe the company has a future under the new management then vote yes to increase the headroom

Should you believe that Premier will shortly go into bankruptcy then follow the advice from the negative campaigners, vote no and sell your stock.

Acker

Expecting more good news next week and Stockbox interview.

Very pleased with Graham Hill.

Acker

Calcutta

Acker

More wine may help.

Whoops--2027

Acker

Still in shock after the Calcutter Cup.

Guly

The costs will rise in 2017 to Approx $1300 per tonne to accommodate tolling and additional transport fees.

Acker

Raaydaar

Just to be clear, I’m not blind to the predicament you’ve outlined. Based on your figures, there is a shortfall, and in that scenario I’d expect another call around late April or May — probably in the region of another 20 billion shares.

However, three points put me in a different camp. First, Hill would have considered this already. If he genuinely believed 60 billion was required, he would have asked for it now rather than risk calling another AGM so soon. I don’t see him choosing to create that problem for himself.

Second, the emphasis on third‑party funding isn’t accidental. PREM has gone out of its way to state that external finance is the priority, and I believe Hill intends to follow through on that.

Third, shareholders simply don’t have the full picture yet. There is clearly work happening behind the scenes that cannot be disclosed at this stage, and that will inevitably influence the funding mix.

We both recognise the challenge of financing the debt — we just differ on where the solution is likely to come from.

Acker

The Trading House will not finance Zulu until the conditions have been met

Mr Hill reported that he still has interest from one or two others. How do you know that these are the same companies?

I envisage a prepayment for industrial materiel.

Acker

Canmax

If Canmax had not been completely satisfied that Zulu could service the cost of getting to commercial production and finance historical debt, why would they agree to move the long stop to 30/06/202?.Hill must have submitted a very convincing financial report.

Acker

Notes on 3rd party

A] Trading House--remains very interested in Zulu progress,will still require the necessary output/grades.

B] One or two other interested parties

C] interest in lower-grade materiel

Hill reported that Premier hadn't yet finalised any definite agreements.

Acker