Member Info for allianze

Well we are to be de-listed. I will post again my e-mail to Borrelli on the 20th July - see below. The e-mail could not be clearer in pointing out to Borrelli his immediate responsibility.

I will now, also post his full reply to me in the following post.

I think that NOW it is time that shareholders start getting together and form a shareholders' group to hold Borrelli to account. As I said in my first post here, its a pity that PIs will only act once the situation becomes dire. Well I suggest that the time is here !

===============================

To alex@bmrplc.com
20 Jul at 9:53 AM

Dear Mr Borrelli,
As a concerned BMR shareholder I am writing in regard to issues that are of concern both to myself, and other BMR shareholders.

There are currently only two critical issues that you, as Executive Chairman and CEO of BMR, need to immediately address. Both of which are in your control, and the responsibility for which cannot be avoided. Both issues need to be in place before BMR's D-Day (Delisting-Day), at the end of this month.

Firstly, to officially sign up a Nomad. What is the delay? Why has this not been done ?
Secondly, to officially request an extension from AIM. Again, what is the delay? Why has this not been done ?

To date you have not resolved these issues, nor updated BMR shareholders. These issues cannot be left to the last day to address. Regarding the AIM extension, it has to be formally requested in advance, possibly providing clarifications to satisfy the AIM regulators, and then get an official confirmation that BMR has an extension. A one month extension should be possible. Even if, you think that currently it is not needed, you have missed so many time-lines in the past that it would be advisable to have it in place, just in case. Further, a one month extension would help by bringing us out of suspension closer to when JLP has sorted out their development plans.

All other issues, however important, are now secondary. Having been for-warned about these issues, if BMR gets de-listed from AIM then it can only be concluded that it has been either negligence on your part in performing your duties, or that it has been done with prior intent. I hope that you will agree that as both Executive Chairman and CEO of the company the ultimate responsibility for the current mess that BMR finds itself in rests with you.

I look forward to read your considered reply to the points raised. Please can you e-mail me back to confirm that you have received and read my correspondence.

If I have not heard from you by the weekend I will send you a registered letter to the BMR offices at 35 Piccadilly, London W1J 0DW. I will also send a copy to the company solicitors Hill Dickinson LLP asking them to pass you a copy.

Yours sincerely

Good to have you back from your self imposed exile! I must admit that I was somewhat amused by some of your posts today. I put it down to you having spent to much time under the mid-day sun !

At 11:11 you started with a passage about Borrelli....'He's also one for getting things done, not necessarily always in favour of shareholders, but he gets things done.' By 18:20 you were advocating 'taking action' against Borrelli ! I liked the 'take action' part better.

What Borrelli has done to date has been an absolute disaster. Even by AIM standards it has been a continuous episode of bungling and incompetence, that has been both comical and tragic to watch. I hope that he can present his 'Plan' tomorrow, and that it can salvage something,..., anything ! Then, if BMR survives he needs to step down.

This not a BMR RNS its from the FTSE.
From what I understand the ffective date of de-listing is 07 August.

Isn't this a clarification between the two dates previously quoted for delisting. If I have read the RNS correctly, the official date of de-listing is now 7th August. ! So I asume that we are still listed. Is that corect ?

----
RNS Number : 6945W
FTSE
02 August 2018

Following the continued suspension and cancellation of trading on AIM for BMR Group (UK, constituent), please see details of affected indexes and effective dates below:

Index ---- FTSE AIM All-Share Index
Effective From Start of Trading ---- 07 August 2018

Borrelli has had a number of opportunities officially, and in private communications with PIs, to make it clear that BMR would NOT to de-listing. Each time he has fudged the issue and instead mentioned his 'Plan'. Well Borrelli will have to make an official statement regarding his 'Plan' this week. It would be farcical if his 'Plan' is just to have us de-listed from AIM.

In my previous e-mail to him I had pointed out that, having been for-warned, if we were de-listed from AIM it would be either by negligence on his part, or done with prior intent . In Borrelli's response to my previous e-mail he wrote: 'BMR is fully aware of the issues you note; we have a team of advisers in place giving advice daily; and discussions have been held with AIM.'

His response to having a 'team of advisers in place giving advice daily' seems strange if his plan is to merely de-list ! Signing up a NOMAD should not require a 'team of advisors'. It could well be that his plan does involve a merger/takeover of some kind with either JLP, GLR or something larger involving BMR with both JLP and GLR. With Colin Bird also a non-executive in the BMR board any of the above is possible. In such a scenario, I would lean towards a merger rather than a takeover.

It would explain why Borrelli does not appear to be bothered about the signing up of a NOMAD, and not coming out of suspension in time. It would be unnecessary if BMR were to merge with any of the other AIM-listed parties. The current 'Normad' effectively acting on BMR's behalf could in fact be JLP's or GLR's NOMAD !

In any of the above scenarios it would all come down to the details of any deal. I would not be against a merger BUT it would depend on the details. Further, the gradual drop of the JLP share price towards the 2p mark would indicate an ultimate 1:1 share conversion. Contrary to some JLP shareholders opinions, JLP's position is also NOT as strong as they would like to think. IMO, they need a deal as much as BMR, and would be damaged if a deal was not made. JLP need to move away from just Pt/Chrome and become a more diverse producer both in metals as well as in jurisdiction. If GLR is involved, they also need a deal since they do not have the finance to prove up their Zambian asset in a timely manner, and without severely diluting their PIs over time. Also, they need Kabwe to progress in order to process their ores.

If all parties acted appropriately then it could be a win-win situation for all. Even then, it cannot be overlooked that the Borrelli Plan has manoeuvred BMR PIs into a situation where they have little choice but to agree with the arrangements presented to them. This did not have to happen, and it is why whether the deal is Good, Bad or Ugly, Borrelli needs to go.

All IMHO

Richi1414,

If delisted this board will still continue, and posters will be able to post here for a long while after. However, some of the sites functions that will be irrelevant such as 'BMR Live RNS' etc will be disabled. If concerned, posters can contact LSE and get info regarding this. When ALO de-listed, the ALO the board continued and posters were still be able to communicate.

BrinMyReward,

I think far more posters here appreciate your efforts in keeping up communications with Borrelli than those that who do not. I also agree that it is important to remain positive and not give in. I hope that you will reconsider your decision to stay away from posting because of the bickering. I am sure there will still be some bickering, but also hope that most shareholders will see the need to join together if only in their own self -interests.

What is required now is a more formal and documented form of communication. This can only be done with a BMR shareholders' group. .

bjlabuk, I am a recent BMR holder. I think that some of the LT holders that most members here recognise and respect should take the lead. Of-course, I would join any such shareholders' group, and would contribute where possible.

Regarding BMRWatch: I did try and join, and for a brief time I was able to get onto the group's forum. But I cannot login now? But I agree that if the core of the previous group is still intact then it could provide a good starting point. They could start adding to their registry by appealing for new members to join.

Also, just because BMRWatch did not succeed previously in getting sufficient support does not mean that it will not get the required support this time round. Possibly, this could be the time for BMRWatch or a newly constituted group, formed out of the same members, to call for support.

IMO follow the SOLO example. It's the quickest and simplest route to set up a shareholdres' group. Some of the longer term holders, and/or regular and respected posters on this BB, need to take the lead. Set up an e-mail address, and those PIs interested in joining can send the number of shares they hold and a valid contact e-mail address.

IF there is sufficient interest then members can supply their full names as well. That way the company can verify the percentange of shareholders that the group is claiming it represents. This will increase the validity/legitamacy of the group in any communications with the company. The shareholder group's main objective would be to represent its members concerns and interests, and demand that shareholders should be regularly kept informed and updated about issues. Possibly, a regular monthly/bi-monthly Q&A session posted on the company website for a start.

sercher70, I agree that shareholder apathy is a major problem. It is unfortunate that PIs will only start to organise when the situstion is most dire. It could be that we are approaching another such event.

IMO, whether the company is de-listed or not, shareholders need to consider setting up a shareholder group, if only to make sure that the BOD/Borrelli provides adequate updates. As I pointed out in an earlier post, a shareholder group can have a tremendous effect in preserving the interests of existing PIs, and it will be even more important if a de-listing occurs.

Follow the example provided by the LSE shareholders in SOLO, and the way they set up their shareholders group. The group's membership does not have to constitute the largest shareholding group in the company to be effective. Get over 5% membership holding and the BOD/Borrelli cannot dismiss their concerns, and ignore their communications.

Anything over 10% and Borrelli will have to pay attention to their demands. It took just two weeks for SOLO PIs to get over 10%. It is true that JLP will probably still remain the significant shareholder. However, in the decisions to come where votes will be required for its passing they may have excuse themselves due to being a related party and PIs may have a chance to influence events. Also, JLP would be careful not to want to be seen overriding the concerns of small PIs and interests. But only, IF they are organised and make enough noise that they cannot be ignored. However, if there is no such group then the concerns of PIs will be neglected.

Firstly, no one will be happier than myself if Borrelli's plan does NOT entail de-listing. I do NOT know if we will de-listed for certain, only that the current direction of travel is similar to others that I have seen. I have been though one de-listing and it did not turn out well for PIs. So it is important for PIs to discuss this in a rational manner now, and be better prepared if de-listing occurs. The best option then would be for PIs to organise. This is the only avenue they will have to protect their interests. Considering BMR history, this should have been done well before now!

Some have cited examples of companies that have de-listed and have continued to operate. I have not studied these companies so cannot comment. However, just because these companies have continued to operate DOES NOT give an indication of what happened to the previous PIs of those companies, and whether those PIs were severely disadvantaged or wiped out! That is usually the case in these circumstances.

Of-course BMR being de-listed is not the' end of the world'. BMR could also continue as a private entity. However, IMO current PIs - certainly the longer holders with higher averages - would be severely disadvantages. Even those who entered at the 2p mark may be badly effected. The only issue will be how badly!

Also, it is not correct to assume that JLP, as a current BMR shareholder, will suffer the same fate as the individual PIs, post de-listing. JLP as a significant shareholder will be able to use its shareholding and influence in the board room to its advantage, unlike PIs. New 'investors' invited in post de-listing will probably demand a larger chuck of the company, and most probabily below the suspension price. They will also do well, at the expense of existing PIs.

Some have commented that if we are de-listed then we can re-list conviently later when conditions improve. Firstly, in our case it will be forced de-listing NOT a voluntary de-listing. BMR will be booted-off the Exchange because it has breached AIM rules (in BMR's case possibly two rule breaches). It will effectively be considered as 'unfit' to operate on the Exchange. Trying to re-list is not going to be as straightforward as some think. It will not be as simple as coming out of suspension. BMR will have to re-apply to AIM from scratch, and this will incur additional time, costs and much greater scrutiny.

- All IMHO

I received a reply from Mr Borrelli at 10:16am but I did not get to read it until now. I will not post his e-mail here and will respect the confidentiality notice in the email ... 'This email is confidential and may be protected by legal privilege..etc.' But I will post my reply to Borrelli.

--------------
Dear Mr Borrelli,
Firstly, thank you for the reply to my e-mail. It is appreciated.

RE: Signing up a new nomad.
You say that the issue of WHIreland wishing to resign was known months ago. That you have been in discussions with possible replacements. In which case why has an orderly replacement not been made by know, and in an orderly and timely manner? What is the difficulty hold up the appointment ? Why are shareholders starting to receive corporate notices alerting them of possible de-listing ?

RE: BMR is fully aware of the issues you note; we have a team of advisers in place giving advice daily; and discussions have been held with AIM.
This is reassuring. Then I take it that shareholders can expect that an AIM extension WILL be announced soon. Mr Borrelli, I understand that there are other key matters, include the licence and revising its conditions, and fund raising. But I also hope that you would agree that de-listing from AIM would place the company and its shareholders in a far more vulnerable position than they are now. Also, these other 'key' issues that you note would also be badly affected.

I appreciate that there is a lot of responsibility on your shoulders, certainly at the time. Please can you ensure that the NOMAD and the AIM Extension are in place as soon as possible to avoid breaching AIM rules, and that BMR remains listed on AIM.

Kind Regards

-----------------------------

VIGENERE. Regarding 'I can only repeat that no reliable analysis of the " plan" to be detailed to us by 3rd. August ? '
As I pointed out no one is criticising any Borrelli master plan. We don't know what it is. But what I do know is that I don't want BMR to be de-listed from AIM. This will certainly leave shareholders in a more vulnerable position. Unless that IS the Borrelli plan !

It is not uncommon for AIM companies wishing to de-list to go into suspension then drag out the suspension until they breach AIM rules, and then have AIM do the job for them. This avoids having to go to shareholders for a vote to de-list. Detailing the plan by 3rd August may breach the first rule of AIM regarding not having a NOMAD in place.

VIGENERE there is nothing wrong in having faith in Borrelli, and his plan. The problem is having 'blind' faith and one can easily cross into the other !

E-mail was sent at 09:43 to info@bmrplc.com. I also called the office and spoke to the receptionist. Asked if there was another more official e-mail address for Borrelli that I can send my e-mail to. She gave me alex@bmrplc.com. I sent the e-mail to that e-mail address also.

I also asked her to leave him a message. To inform him that I had sent him important e-mail. Also, if I had not received a reply by the end of the weekend that I will send a registered letter to the office at 35 Piccadilly, London W1J 0DW, and also send a copy to the company solicitors Hill Dickinson LLP asking them to pass him a copy.

To answer some of your points and concerns VIGENERE.
Regarding 'Do you realise that Mr. A. Borelli has millions of shares in BMR ?'
Whether the company is de-listed, or goes into administration, I can assure you that Borrelli will emerge in a far better position than any BMR shareholder here. For AIM directors its a win-win scenario, what ever happens. I do not think anyone should upset themselves over Borrelli's future.

Regarding 'become acquainted with the exact terms of the plan before criticising it'.
Wishing to remain listed, rather than being booted off AIM, should not affect any Borrelli plan. I hope that he does has a plan B. I wish that he would share it with us. I will be eager to hear it. But please can you tell me what Borrelli plan has actually been successful in the past. Can you point me to a track record of successful delivery of a plan, or any time-line that has been met .

The problem here has not been that shareholders have interfered with BOD business. Rather it has been the complete lack of shareholder intervention to keep the past and present BOD in check. That has resulted in the litany of errors and the current sorry situation of BMR.

Then let him declare it ! However, the two issues that heed to be address, as listed below, are related to BMR and he should have no difficulty in acting on BMR shareholders' interest. I see no conflict of interest, and I believe any legal advise will also bear this out.

sidebar,

Bird is no fool. He knows exactly the position that Borrelli has put BMR in. But Bird as a BMR non-executive also has legal duties to act in BMR shareholders interest.

Also, what could will enbolden JLP/Bird to put pressure on Borrelli is the fact that there has been NO concerted shareholder response to the litany of mistakes made by Borrelli that will . The fact that shareholders, may now belately challenge Borrelli should act as a warning to Bird at co that BMR shareholders will not passively bend over and get shafted.

Regarding the AIM Extension: Agree that having the extension in hand does not mean that it has to be used if they get the act together in time.

Barno,
As bjabuk, I will also be sending a registered letter as well. If I get no response then I may cosider contacting the company's Solicitors Hill Dickinson LLP. They will make sure that he is informed !

There also Colin Bird who is now a BMR non-exceutive who's role is to sagfeguard shareholder's interest. Maybe he will inform Borrelli, since Bird is now also on the hook !

bjabuk
I would advise sending your letter by registered mail. It has to be signed for on delivery, and will provide proof of delivery.

bjabuk, yes by all means send your amended version to Borrelli by post. The more shareholders contacting him the better. The less chance he has in denying he received it.

However, I would advise that questions be focused to the two immediate issues 1) the signing up of the Nomad and 2) the Aim extension. He then has less chance to avoid responding to them. Other issues can be raised later, once BMR are safely out of suspension.

BringMyReward, after sending the e-mail I will also try and call him at the office number (and leave a message), informing him of my e-mail. If you could, will you call him next week and also ask him if he has received the messages, again regarding these two issues.

If I get a reply back from Borrelli I will post it here, as it is relevant to all shareholders

Regards

I will be sending the following e-mail to Borrelli. If anyone wishes to make any comments, or thinks that it can be improved, please do so it will be appreciated. I will send off the e-mail tommorrow.

--------------

Dear Mr Borrelli,

As a concerned BMR shareholder I am writing you regarding issues that are of concern both to myself, as well other BMR shareholders.

There are currently only two issues that you, as Executive Chairman and CEO, needs to address. Both of which are in your control, and the responsibility for which cannot be shifted. Both issues need to be in place well before BMR's D-Day (Delisting-Day), at the end of this month.

Firstly, to officially sign up a Nomad. What is the delay? Why has this not been done ?
Secondly, to officially request an extension from AIM. Again, what is the delay? Why has this not been done ?

These issues cannot be left to the last day to address. Regarding the AIM extension, it has to be formally requested in advance, possibly providing clarification to satisfy AIM regulators, and get an official confirmation that BMR has an extension. A one month extension should be possible. EVEN IF, you think that currently it is not needed, you have missed so many timelines in the past that one would think it would be advisable to have it in place, just in case. Further, a one month extension would help BMR by bringing us out of suspension closer to when JLP has sorted out their development plans.

All other issues, however important, are currently secondary. Having been for-warned about these issues, if BMR gets de-listed from AIM, then it can only be concluded that it has been negligence on your part in performing your duties. I hope that you will agree that as the Executive Chairman and CEO of the company it has been solely your responsibility for all the decisions made up to now to get BMR into this mess.

I look forward to read your considered reply to the points raised. Please can you e-mail me back to confirm that you have received and read my e-mail.

Yours Sincerely