Member Info for allianze

BringMyReward,

Thanks for the reply. At this late stage, important issues still seems uncertain and left to go to the wire. Borrelli has not provided clear answers to these issues, and it is left to interpretion.

IMO de-listing from AIM, and listing on NEX, is not a good option. All other options leave us in a poorer negotiating position if we have been booted off AIM.

IMO, in the absence of a shareholders' group your contact with Borrelli, and the posts here, will help in providing at least some form of documentation.

I would like to e-mail Borrelli, rather than call him, as it will be better documented. Have you by chance got Borrelli's e-mail address. The only one I can find is the Contact e-mail from the BMR website. Email: info@bmrplc.com. I don't know if he would check that out. However, I will be sending an e-mail to that address in any case.

Regards

BringMyReward, thanks for your efforts and the update. Just a few points.

IMO, there are currently only two issues that Borrelli needs to address. Both of which are in his control and he cannot shift responsibility for. Both issues need to be in place before BMR's D-Day (Delisting-Day) !

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

He cannot leave it to the last day to address these. 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 after 7th August. A one month extension should be possible. EVEN IF, he thinks that currently he does not need it, he has 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 secondary. If BMR gets suspended, then Borrelli has been negligent in his duties to the company and shareholders. He cannot even plead ignorance and incompetence because he has been for-warned about these issues.

Regarding Borrelli's other comment: 'He said he feels the need to come clean and tell everyone what’s been happening and why it happened. ' IMO he is figuring out how to shift blame. Either the Zambian authorities or his side-kick Jeremy Hawke. He is the Executive Chairman and CEO. He has sole responsibility for all decisions made to get BMR into this mess.

Regarding '...any pics of the plant, he said not much has happened there recently so it’s not worth it at the moment '. But , according to JLP's recent RNSs it states that the 'Zinc recovery circuit under construction'. So lets have a pic of that!

It will be interesting to hear Borrelli update the shareholders, according to his 'calculations', on the eve of D-Day. Lets wait and hear his master plan. However, I would not be surprised if he has manoeuvred shareholders into a situation that does not benefit shareholders but they cannot vote against it !

Regards

BringMyReward,

I hope that by next week Borrelli can provide a bit more clarity, and things work out as he expects. Again, your efforts are appreciated.

Regarding, being too short notice for setting up a shareholders' group, and no interest shown by shareholders. If BMR are de-listed it may be the only formal way that shareholders have to get Borrelli to answer their questions. At ALO, shareholders only got motivated once they realised that they were to be de-listed. It took around 1 week to assemble around 5%, and 2 weeks to get to the 10% mark. The BOD could not ignore the group and they had to provide detailed answers to shareholders, and keep them updated. At SOLO I see that they have managed to get around 15% support in a similar time frame, and have had direct talks with their BOD.

Unfortunately, I agree that it takes a lot to mobilise shareholders. In any case, it is something that shareholders here may wish to reconsider.

Regards

BringMyReward, thanks for the update. Just a few points.
Re: The New Nomad.
He says that 'we have a new Nomad doing a lot of work for us' BUT it appears that he has still not signed them up! Did he say why not, and who is the new 'Nomad' ?

Re: The sequence of events that still need to fall in place before we can re-list - ie: The ministry clarifying licence issues, JLP agreeing and signing the JV, Investors committing, signing the new Nomad, THEN relisting !
It seems that there are just too many pieces that need to fall in place before the end of the month !

Its good that you will be contacting Borrelli again. Next week can you please pin Borrelli down regarding:
1) Has he been in contact with AIM and asked for a possible extension, to provide us with a little more of a safety net.
2) If not, why not ! I remember that ALO managed to get a further one month extension. Although they still failed again to complete their negotiations which led to them being struck off.
I think these are the main issues currently to prevent us from being struck off AIM. Borrelli has a track record of failing every timeline he sets. I can see him, either by incompetence or by design, pushing things to the wire again and failing to deliver. Unless he gets clear confirmation from AIM on an extension then they will kick BMR off AIM. It's then a ***** to get back in.
3) When is he planning to provide an update to all shareholders. Will he do a Q/A session, either in writing or a video/ phone-in before the end of the month - He can get some pointers from Colin Bird who is an old hand at doing these at JLP !

ALSO, something that shareholders may want to discuss again. Re-considering the setting up of a shareholders' group. Whether BMR is de-listed or not, this would help greatly in getting answers to ligitimate questions, and having it documented.

Regards

Regarding the JV:

I must admit that this saga is also confusing. JLP confirm that they are working hard on the ground at Kabwe in building the plant. That they have the Zinc circuit in place, and their research team is progressing the other extraction circuits. They appear to have committed themselves to the project and yet they are pushing the signing of the JV out again to end of August.

Is it reasonable for JLP to announce at the end of August that they have pulled out! In a large part the fall in their shareprice is a result of the uncertainty created in their completion of the JV. I would have thought that this would have undermined, and weakened, both BMR's and JLP's positions not only in the market but also wrt to the Zambian authorities.

The continuing events do not make much sense ! We need to get an RNS next week confirming that a NEW Nomad has been signed up. I hope that next week when you contact him again he is in a better position to clarify these points.

BringMyReward,

Firstly, thanks for your continued efforts in contacting Borrelli and posting your conversation. I am sure that you will take him up on his offer for you to call him back next week when he can provide more clarification. I hope that you will again post any further clarifications.

I have a small holding here and have been following events here with some amusement and concern. It reminds me of ALO going into suspension and then sliding into de-listing from AIM by management continually pushing things out until de-listing occurred. Granted the circumstances there were more complicated, but nevertheless the same pattern appears to be in play.

Coming back to your current conversation with Borrelli, regarding the Nomad:
It appears that Borrelli and the Nomad have not been good terms due to their involvement with the previous management, and signing off on £4m worth of copper assets at Kabwe that didn't exist. In which case why were they not removed as Nomad. He had plenty of time since becoming CEO&Chairman to find a new Nomad. He says that he was told that changing the Nomad was not good practice ! By whom was he told this ?

He is an experienced director on AIM, and a chartered accountant. He knows that companies replacing their Nomads is not uncommon, especially on AIM, and there may be numerous reasons to do so. In this case, I would have thought that the Nomad would have been replaced as soon as possible when he took over, since they were potentially one party from whom Borrelli could have claimed back monies for shareholders, as he did with Masoud Alikhani.

He says that he has been discussing the Nomad's resignation for about a year. In which case why has he not sorted out a replacement in good time, and an orderly manner before now. Without the need for another alarming RNS, with the potential to for getting BMR de-listed!

He says that the NEW Nomad has been in touch with AIM, presumably regarding their involvement with BMR, BUT he hasn't up yet signed them up! He says that's he is working towards getting the Nomad in place and re-listing before the deadline. Why is he again pushing things to the last possible moment !

Mcfirth, Having been out of the market of so long, and with a re-naming, it will take a little time for the market to catch up with the potential here. The company hasn't exactly come out with their PR blazing, preparing the market for their re-admittance. Hope that will change. Also, there should be more news shortly on their gold assets.

If you put CRA here on the LSE in the 'Share Price Seach' and press 'GO' it takes you the Corac Share Trades site. I think that Corac was a company with the same EPIC (CRA) that is no longer trading. My order is showing up there as a SELL but its a BUY at 08:20:41 --- 30,909 shares at 11p. LSE needs to update the page to now show Cradle Arc name and other details.

GS, Placed my order online with ii. First attempt at 8:10 failed but second attemp went through OK.

The latest Corporate Presentation (January 2018) is available for review at the cradle arc website http://cradlearc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Corporate-Presentation-23.01.18.pdf GLA

I think that this is a good move. Mark Jones needed to be moved aside, and a new person moved in to take the helm. MJ was rather tainted with the delays and failure to complete the RTO. Kevin van Wouw (CEO) should have more credibility in the market goimng forward. Lets hope that he can now move this company forward.

A new thread has been set up in the members section to discuss futher questions to put to the BOD, especially regarding the recent comments made by the Managing Director of Leboam Holdings, Kevin van Wouw. Members can sign in and make their coments there. The more members engage the quicker we can send off the new set of questions.

GeologyStudent, Having gone through the ALO RNS on 22 August 2016 :Letter of Intent for Earn-in Agreement for Kossanto East Gold Project. I don't see how this is an equitable deal for ALO. I have to agree with Ashanti's CEO. It seems to have been a much better deal for them than for ALO. The three main provisions were: - LOI envisages Ashanti having the right to earn-in for a 65 per cent. interest in the Project (the 'Earn-In') by completing a Preliminary Feasibility Study ('PFS') within a period of 36 months (the 'Option Period') · Should Ashanti not complete the PFS within the Option Period, it may instead elect to pay, in cash, US$4 million to Alecto within 90 days of the end of the Option Period in order to satisfy the Earn-In requirement · If either party's interest falls below 10 per cent. then that party's interest will convert to a 1.5 per cent. net smelter return royalty ('NSR'). The other party shall then have the right, for a period of one year thereafter, to purchase the NSR by paying US$100,000 for each 0.1 per cent. (up to a maximum of US$1.5 million. So, Ashanti only had a right of an earn-in for their 65% if they carried us to a PFS. They had given ALO no monies as part of this initial deal. However, after only 12months, Ashanti have now taken over the complete Kossanto East Gold Project for a mere US $ 0.79m. The only interesting part fpr ALO is this the last part regarding the 1.5% net smelter return royalty ('NSR'). BUT this does not put any obligation on Ashanti to purchase the NSR but only the right if they wish to. So the question is how much value is there in the 1.5% NSR for ALO. Why couldn't ALO, as a part of the deal, get a Ashanti to also pay for part of the NSR upfront and include an obligation to buy the rest in monthly payments at US$100,000 for each 0.1 per cent. Also, will the money obtained be used to lower the £5m funding proposed. IMO the answer will be no. I think that they are in need of the money just to see them through to the completion of the fund raise, which they exect to be by the end of August.

GeologyStudent, I'm not adverse to having ALO sell its peripheral gold assets to concentrate on Mowana, in this case Kossanto East Project. ALO could certainly do with the additional funds. But is it at a reasonable price ? CAD $1m. That's around £0.61m. How much have ALO spent over the years in drilling in the area ? Are we selling out of desperation at fire-sale prices ? I have no idea ! GeologyStudent, you say that its '35% interest in a relatively small gold deposit (Kossanto East).' But does that take into account recent success of Ashanti Gold, and possibly more going forward ? Tim McCutcheon (Ashanti CEO) obviously thinks that its a great deal for Ashanti. He says:' We are extremely happy to be able to make this transaction. There was a one-time special situation whereby Ashanti could take title to Kossanto in a very favorable transaction, and we decided to take advantage of this opportunity.' OK, there is also 1.5% net smelter return going forward. In the ALO RNS on 22nd August 2016 it states that: 'The other party shall then have the right, for a period of one year thereafter, to purchase the NSR by paying US$100,000 for each 0.1 per cent. (up to a maximum of US$1.5 million)'. I would have been more enthused if as part of the deal they had negotiated that the Ashanti also took the 1.5% net smelter return for $1.5m. Combined monies would have certainly made a difference to ALO.

Agree with the early comment that ''The Randgold update is devoid of any great detail but the fact they are executing a RC drilling campaign can only be interpreted as a positive.'' Here, ALO as a joint partner with a 35% holding, should be updating its shareholders with a more detailed analysis of what is happening once Randgold has published its quartely reports. Randgold have many projects and ongoing explorations and can only supply a limited amount of information about a specific project. Going by ALO's previous documents: (https://)(www.)(rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/1168O_-2016-2-4.pdf) : Figure 2 nicely summarises some of the key results from Alecto’s previous exploration work at Kossanto West. Showing numerous gold occurrences having already been identified by Alecto. However, as I understand it Randgold has returned to first principles in the Phase 1 work programme, and are carrying out their own separate survey. Also. they state that if results justify it, reconnaissance drilling will follow with either diamond core or RC drilling. So the fact that they are considering RC drilling must be a positive. It would be useful if we knew where, within the permit boundaries of Kossanto West, Randgold is concentrating on. If they coincide with areas previously studied by ALO. It would be strange if the permit did not turn up economic quantities of gold for mining. The question is of course the amount. My thinking is that : If the quantity is in the multi-million oz range then Rangold will continue with their involvement in the project, and maybe increase their holding from the current 65%. If it is at or below a million oz, then they may not wish to continue and pull out, since I believe that Randgold has a rough cut-off rule they exercise in evaluating whether a project is of a suitable size for them to participate. In that case, 100% of the licence should revert back to ALO, and they will have a well explored and quantified asset which should be lucrative from a miner the size of ALO. The possibility that the permit does not satisfy either of these outcomes must surely be small.

GeologyStudent, What are you assuming for the price of copper and gold in your calculations. With the recent rise in copper prices ( from 2.50 to 2.87 ) and the forcast for it to strength ( as demad rises and the dollar weakens ) it would be informative to provid e a range of share price targets with different commodity prices quoted.

Even as late as 08/06/2017 the Company's own broker, Beaufort Securities's reseach note was suggesting that ''Alecto will look to raise £2.5m -£3.5m of equity to fund the ramp-up''. This was not including the £1.8m raised. Not the £5m now suggested. Also, they were taking the equity raised to be at 0.13p , not the price that Mark Jones is now suggesting. In fact, in the latest RNS he is not even saying that the raise will be at the suspended price, but 'around' that price. So it could be even lower. Since the suspension of shares in December at the depressed shareprice of 0.065p and Mowana in mothballs, 7 months of work, effort and ALO shareholders' money has been put into Mowana. Mowana is now a producing mine, with a completed independent CPR evaluation, and a off-take agreement already in place with Fujax Minerals and Energy Limited, and further having already started shipping and getting paid for deliveries. Yet, Mark Jones still has not completed the transaction, has managed to get us booted of AIM, and now wants to raise £5m at the highly dilutive price we went into suspension 7mths ago. After the consolidation will come the dilution.

JEPh, We knew already from the RNS dated 21-Dec-16 : ''Proposed Acquisition of Copper Mine, Botswana'' , under the section Board changes, that: ''Mr Chapman has decided that, given his close involvement with the Proposed Transaction, he should step down as Chairman with immediate effect, but remain as a non-executive director of the Company.'' However, I can see no reference to Chapman was to step down from his non-excutive role. The news today was unexpected.

Hi royoboy, They may well do. But it will be the information that they want to disseminate. There are impottant questions that need answering.and they will not get answered without some prompting. There is a discussion thread just started on the new site to determine the best way to proceed, and soon a thread to compile questions that members would like to pose to the BOD regarding recent events, progress made and steps being taken going forward. Your input and the input of other long term holders would be welcomed.

DeanJones1993 , Gige If you wish to join the ALO Share Holders Group go to: alectoshareholders(dot)co(dot)uk(/index.php) Should work even without the usual (http://)(www) infront. There you can register and then can input your shareholding in the Share Holdings List. I think for security reasons Harpy has made the Share Holding List now only available for members. From the Home page Click on the 'Member Shareholdings' on the Left Hand Side of the page. Under Discussions, click 'Share Holdings List '. At the bottom of the page, in the comments section enter your share info.