Member Info for addicknt

RT, I thought he was going there this week? We know he attended the BHP celebration in London last week, although that doesn't mean he didn't go later in the week or at the weekend. Either way, let's hope he comes away with a few agreements signed-off.

'It's a penny share'.

Market cap: half a billion pounds. The good news is no one's interested - apparently; not the government, not Franco and least of all shareholders.

IP, your suspicions of share manipulation are shared, and I can tell you they're not being ignored.

Nal, I see, so if someone posts something which obviously invites discussion, we should simply ignore it? It may surprise you to learn that this is a 'discussion board'. The clue's in the title.

And what's all this utter tosh about 'controlling the narrative'? How exactly is that possible? Again, you may have noticed people express their opinions freely and are not 'controlled' by anyone.

If you had one ounce of self-awareness you'd recognise you're the person who tries to shut down anyone who posts something you don't like. You do it day in day out and combine it with your usual defamatory comments.

My response to BP asked a couple of questions and then said I thought he had highlighted a number of reasons why we won't own this by the time Cascabel is producing. What exactly is wrong with that? Why did it offend you so much?

Actually, I'll tell you why. It's because you saw my moniker at the top of post , which you see as being a good enough reason to attack me, regardless of what I say. You exercise no judgement and simply spout your usual bile. What an utter disgrace you are.

Nal, what sarcasm? Your inability to understand what people actually say is absolutely epic.

BTW, I assume you also agree with his strong sell recommendation?

Buffet, was that AI generated?

Regardless, and perhaps unwittingly, it offers an explanation of why it's very unlikely that we'll take this all the way.

Having said that, our management team are unusually well qualified to raise funding - unlike most juniors. They are smart guys and are fully aware of the challenges and I find it difficult to believe they see themselves as running a production company, although they may end up doing so if the plans for Tan come to pass. Will they/we be here when the first ore emerges from Cascabel? Not in my book.

Well spotted MM.

How long before Panda appears telling us a bid's on its way on Monday?

NMM, many thanks for that, it's really helpful.

My interest was piqued by the DGR announcement which made no reference to Tenstar or Samuel, which was surprising as he controls both.

As you say, the effects of dilution have been considerable, and specifically the issue of shares to the Cornerstone holders. This was exacerbated by his failure to subscribe for new shares in the last two placings( it may be only one).

I would have been really surprised if he'd sold any shares as I'm convinced he'll never walk away from this until a very large payday arrives.

Anyway, thanks again.

FTJNY, since it was me who raised the issue of NM's holding, I think I owe you a reply.

If what I read is true, it's of considerable significance. A holding of circa 20% is to be in a strong position when it comes to any issue which requires shareholder support. It's considerably less so at 10%.

By posting the observation I had hoped to elicit the opinion of others and to perhaps uncover the truth. There were some helpful responses, but I'm still not sure we've got the definitive answer.

I think you know me well enough to understand that I'm anything but a de-ramper and my motivation most certainly was not an attempt to drive the price down. Nor do I believe any post on these boards has any effect whatsoever on daily movements. There's no point ignoring something you may not wish to read - as far as shareholding is concerned, ignorance is not bliss.

NMM, well, they're holding all the cards at the moment, so he needs to tread carefully.

Damers, I wasn't linking a meting with Noboa with agreeing the levy issue. My thinking was simply that he's there to conclude (hopefully) the two issues with the relevant government personnel.

Some positive news next week would be welcome.

Are we in a Mexican standoff with the government? Is it the case they won't give us the cipa until we agree to pay the levy? Is this what DV's in Quito for?

NMM, yes they were.

IP, even by your own lamentable standards, your last post is utter twaddle.

Smick, thanks for that. The implication of this is that NM's position has reduced considerably, although 10% is still an important holding. It wasn't that long ago that the general assumption on here was that he still controlled close to 20% of the equity.

Not2sure, Samuel bailed-out DGR earlier this year with a a sizeable loan/equity issue, which gave NM more or less total control.

Q, you're right, I'd forgotten about them. I think that info about Samuel is wrong - they were listed as shareholders far more recently than 2022 - and DGR remain holders of 6.8%.

Q, indeed. So when did Samuel sell, which I assume would require a declaration, specifically because they are a related party to NM? Did they need the money for their bail-out of DGR?

I'm almost certain NM had more than 2.8%, even after taking dilution into account.

From memory, the combined holdings of Samuel, DGR and NM were circa 18/19%. We now have a situation whereby Samuel aren't mentioned as being significant holders in the presentation and NM's holding is stated as being only 2.8%, which is a figure I don't recall ever having seen.

It's quite probable I'm barking up the wrong tree, but it's not at all clear and implies all three parties have been selling, which should have been declared. I'm sure there's a simple explanation, but, as ever, it's confusing.

Any clues, folks?

I don't think it is because it would have to be specified as such, which it always has been.

DGR has released an update of its various investee companies. It states they have a 6.8% shareholding in us and that NM has a further beneficial holding of 2.8%. I then looked at at most recent presentation which says the two parties own a total of 9.5%. There is no mention of Samuel Holdings having any shares, which is odd because they are/were regarded as a related party to NM and as such their holding should be declarable.

Am I right in thinking this represents a considerable change?