Member Info for aiminvestor

Noclue,

My logic is quite simple, as other companies have done in the past when a rumour has been spread on the blogs, put out a specific denial, nd everyone will believe it and move on. By not doing so, or only telling people in private phone calls and obscurely written social media posts, they are creating doubt, which is ridiculous when it could easily be cleared up.

If 7n doesn't exist, CUSN should say so! Simples......

Not sure why you think I have "19 accounts" on ADVFN, I assure you I do not, so please don't just make up any more falsehoods. If you need to know something you can just ask.

Valuation,

Where is the specific reference to the 7b rumour and denial of it in that RNS?

I only have two "concerns", no RNS denial specifically denying 7b, and why Richard Williams left so suddenly from his position?

THe company can still address the first, but I guess we'll never knpw the reason for the latter.

Noclue,

"Why would they bother to RNS when they already answered it in a statement that covers ALL possible versions of ingress."

Because they have not specifically addressed the rumour in an RNS, that's why!

You clearly do not understand what the Regulated News Service is for, and the difference between it and Facebook, Telegram, and Twitter (X). If you did you wuld understand why I want tohe company to come out and clearly stae in an RNS that 7B does not exist, and that would end the matter.

The fact that they are prepared to deny it over the phone and on social media channels but not in an RNS worries someone like me who has invested in mining stocks for a long time. With an RNS the management are hanging their reputation on the content in an official way, as is the NOMAD of course.

You cannot say only myself and a few other posters are the only ones concerned, or are you claiming to have personal contact with all the UK's investors?

How do you know how many people are not investing because it has not been denied officially? You don't, period, so please don't make untrue statements.

As for the rest of your childish post, you have no idea what stocks I'm invested, have invested in, or ones I might be invested in, or would like to invest in, so don't post falsehoods just to try and impress anynone dumb enough to be impressed by that sort of gibberish.

It's not my "position" at all.

I am only asking why the comany cannot come out and officially deny the rumour that has been circulating for a couple of months now.

Once they deny it, it's gone, and people can move on, but by not denying it doubts remain.

In all honesty at this juncture there's not going to be much news to drive the price higher whilst the shaft repairs are underway, so they might as well RNS it as they can only benefit from the denial.

It still nags away at me that Richard Williams left so suddenly, but I know that doesnt suit the narrative here.

"And try as I might I can find no mention of 7B in this most overarching of documents regarding water in South Crofty"

I wonder why the compny can't come straight out and deny it then? That would seem to be the simple solution.

Battyk,

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make there.

If you go to the top of the page you will see a button 'CUSN Live RNS', where you will find all Cornish Metals' RNS announcements. They already issue RNS announcements, so they are already part of the >75% of companies that do!

There's a new one today, for example!

In Canada announcements are logged on SEDAR, and have the sale level of confidence as an RNS announcement in that they are recorded as official company announcements. That's why I bang on about them, because they are official company announcements, logged on a database and cannot be changed or deleted.

And that's the whole point about why they exit in the first place!

"So you class the CUSN website as social media and infer that you do not trust it as you rely on RNS?"

Why do you think the London Stock Market uses RNS? (Regulated News Service)

Why don't they simply abandon that and companies can use twitter, facebook or any other social media website to make announcements?

Why don't you contact the LSE and tell them RNS have no purpose whatsoever, are a waste of money, and do not help market regulation, and see how they reply to you??

"There is no RNS on 7b as it (7b) does not exist - the latest information is stated in the RNS "

So why don't they say so in an RNS??? That would be so easy!!!

And please be careful about accusing me of "trying to mislead iother investors", I am doing nothing of the sort. If you think I am, that is a crime and you should report me to the FCA. It's also a very serious accusation, so that works both ways!!!

Batty,

Thanks, but I asked "Great, can you please direct me to the RNS where they explicitly denied 7B?"

RNS are what I rely on, not social media.

Smartp

Great, can you please direct me to the RNS where they explicitly denied 7B?

I musy have missed it and once I have read it I will be pleased to not mention it again.

Fpvone

Yes I am fixated on this issue as a lack of an explicit denial suggests there might be something to the rumour after all.

It costs very little to issue an RNS, it used to be £150, and the NOMAD's legals could review it in a couple of minutes, so hardly a serious cash drain for a company line CUSN.

They could have put a quick denial on the bottom of the RNS they issued on the 11th July, and it wouldn't have cost them a single penny.

It's a total nonsense that they refuse to address it, and nobody knows how many investors the uncertainty created is preventing from investing! When your share price is falling, it needs all the friends it can get, so that's why they should address it, pride comes before the fall etc.

Secureconomics.

"Aiminvestor - you said on the 4th July at 14:27 that you had asked them. Now you’re saying you don’t know. Did you contact Cusn or not regarding your concerns? Which is it ?"

Both!

I have asked them, and I know what they said in reply, which was verbal rather than written in an official RNS.

The reason the LSE has the RNS system is so that companies can be held to account for what they inform the market.

That is why I do not reply on social media type posts and what is said verbally, as nobody can be held to account.

My beef here is that CUSN will not anounce via RNS what they are willing to tell people verbally, and that creates a nagging doubt.

I think they are too arrogant to do it now, they won't back down, and are being hard nosed, and it's costing them as those guys on ADVFN can continue to stir the rumour, when it could be killed in an instant if CUSN wanted to. Where on earth is the NOMAD?

I'm impressed that you're taking the time to trawl back through my posts by the way!

They could have referred to it in their recent RNS at some point.

Noclue,

Getting more personally insulting reflects more on yourself that anything I could ever post.

With regards to comprehension, someone as perfect as yourself seems to have erred.

"Your comprehension is showing again by the insistence that there is ingress, "

I have NEVER made such a statement, because i don;t know! That's my whole point, the company should clearly state that the 7b rumour is false!

And you say I have "deficiences"?

.....for H & S reasons! hence they stopped the dewatering they had previously announced!.....'

Don't be silly and obvious

If the co had stopped dewatering the mine shaft would be filling back up again drowning the workers

Where do I start here?

They stopped dewatering the shaft so they could repair the timbers.

Instead of lowering the water level they are maintaining it, so don't worry, the workers won't drown!

They are not progressing the dewatering of the shaft until the timbers are replaced, which will be later this year!

Ask them yourself!

Noclue,

Nothing wrong with my reading comprehension, and again you continue th epersonal attacks instead of discussing the company.

Do you always behave in such a manner when you don't agree with someone? or is just behind the keyboard?

"just pointing out your deficiencies" well I'm so fortunate that I have someone so superior and perfect as yourself to point them out for me! Exceedingly kind of you.

"This alone makes your argument moot." No, I was told by the company, so you're making THEIR argument moot, not mine!

They aren't going to issue and RNS to address concerns is disappointing, and reflects poorly on management's judgement , IMO.

Even you must have noticed the price has fallen and continues to bump along the bottom, which suggests the greater market doesn't like something.

If it's not the ingress rumour, then what do you think the market doesn't like?

Noclue,

You're asking the mistake of personally attacking the poster rather than his message.

"Who’d have thought that timbers in water for 26 years could possibly be damaged, huh? "

Well not the company obviously, because they stated that they were in a worse state than they thought! and they felt it was necessary to replace them for H & S reasons! hence they stopped the dewatering they had previously announced!

So you're criticising the company there, not me. that will anger the collective, you're supposed to be following the bull narrative!!!

RNS are for the market, not an individual, and the market seem to agree with me that something doesn't seem right, as the price has fallen back after the recent rise. I still think Richard Williams leaving so suddenly seems strange, but as I've said before I'm an old cynic, whereas a rose tinted specs person like yourself would see nothing wrong at all with someone giving up a comfortable job with a decent salary and perks, would you?

"So, now I have to question the reasoning behind your appearances just to speak negatively about the company. You do realise that 7b, in essence, refers to differential pressures? The water level is maintained, and the works to change timbers were brought forward."

Where am I speaking negatively about the company?

I'm saying they should address the specific 7b rumour to stop it, ad for reasons best known to them they refuse to do it. I think they're wrong to ignore it and I'm entitled to that opinion.

With regards to the timbers, the reason they say they stopped dewatering is due to the dangerously poor condition of the timbers, which was a clear health and safety hazard, so they couldn't continue to dewater until that problem has been rectified.

Bo Clue,

"Sadly, Gingy, the only balanced views are coming from those who hold the stock."

Sadly there are a whole host of people here that believe what you have just written. I remember the sign on Mulder's office wall, very apt here.....

It's all about credibility, and as far as I'm converned they lost it when they failed to address the constant posting oft eh same "problem". A clear and concise rebuttal would have siufficed, management credibility restored and everyone would have moved on.

FWIW I thought the departure of Richard Williams both sudden and strange, but that's just cynical old me, and what do I know?

noclue,

in the past when a malicious rumour has been banded around on social media, companies have addressed that rumour directly by referring to "social media posts" or similar, and refuting it.

that is done via rns, not facebook or twitter, and as the company are putting their name to it, everyone accepts it as true, period. the rumours then stop because everyone accepts what the company has clearly stated to the market.

cusn did not do this, first they chose to ignore the posts, then they decided to tell people over the phone, and now they are *****footing around instead of directly saying "7b does not exist and there is no problem with water ingress".

why they can't do that is beyond me, and a cynic like me with quite a few years of experience in reading company announcements realises it's what's not said in an rns rather than what is that's inportant!

so, i have a nagging doubt and suspicion something is not right, and that seems to be the market's view too as the price is bumping along the bottom.

had they addressed it through the proper channel early on maybe the price wouldn't have fallen as far as it has, and maybe there would be more buying now too? i was considering investing for example.

once doubt has been created it's difficult to shake. i think their advisors are partly to blame, they should have instructed them to nip it in the bud. what is the nomad doing?

fwiw i have not been 'hurt' here, i actally put the funds into another stock instead which has done ok so i have no axe to grind with cusn.

i am disappointed in management though, itheir inaction reflects badly on them in my honest opinion.

i think they have made a mistake here and it continues to cast a shadow. they should have the courage to act rather than try to ignore the problem, the head in the sand approach currently being employed.

THey STILL have not debinked the "7B" theory or rumour specifically, which they should have done at the outset.

I actually think they are being arrogant about it now, so much time wasted discussing something the company could (presumably, and should have denied as soon as it was being discussed on BBs as the price was falling at the time.

So no 'coup de grace’ because they still haven't addressed the point that caused the issue in the first place.

Nice try, but you must try harder.

Why did Richard Williams leave?