Member Info for Andrew4444

"But honestly, how can a company with these many assets not give an update to the market for over 3 months?!"

Maybe because there is no news or the news would show that the previous forward guidance was wrong - so wait until reality catches-up with what was previously stated??

Karl-Erik von Bahr is a prominent Swedish entrepreneur, angel investor, and business advisor known for his significant stakes in early-stage startups and natural resource exploration companies. Operating primarily out of Stockholm and southern Europe, he manages personal and venture capital through his investment vehicle, Trinvest AB.

Current Ventures & Executive Roles

BACCO PROPERTIES SL: Serves as a Director since November 2020 at this real estate development firm located in Palma, Mallorca.

Trinvest AB: Active investor and strategic advisor since 2015, focusing on early-stage companies and network expansion.

Arc Minerals Limited: Built a substantial 3.27% voting rights stake consisting of 80,475,000 shares.

Firering Strategic Minerals PLC: Increased his investment position to a 4.1% stake (16,336,666 shares).

not everyone is as happy with cb re kendrick

from tw in *************

(tbh whether its cb's bs or not, i wouldn't mind a similar rise here - even if its just bs causing it ! go on cb we know you can do it !!

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

colin turd is bull****ting again at kendrick resources

by tom winnifrith

the wretched and shameless octogenarian share spiv colin bird just cannot help himself. he knows that shareholders in kendrick resources (ken) are gullible fools and just plays to that. there is another misleading rns today about the company’s farm in prospect in namibia. the one whose owners tried to tout for a farm in for 4 years with no success until it met then then heavily insolvent kendrick resources.

All my AIM shares up today !! Never known that to happen before

If this continues, I recon I may have made up all by loses in a year or two and could walk away at break even !

WOW I bet not may could say that after "investing" in AIM for years :)

Good old AIM

Agreed NtM

I added another 200kthis am

The settlement agreement certainly clears the desk for a possible JV and move up. we'll see if its another false dawn!

I may even get my money back on this :)

This has before, and will continue, to bounce up and down on this type of news - but not transformational news. Good luck if you if you are trading this.

I'm looking at next 12 to 18 months not next 12 to 18 hours.

In Kent Walton's voice...

"And Gixxer has got Howzap in a half nelson. He wont get out of that......"

I'm starting to wonder if JDAU and HZ are a wrestling tag team ;)

One taps out and the other steps in the ring :)

Remember it's Two Falls, Two Submissions or a Knockout wins:

where's Kent Walton when you need him !!

I hardly ever do this. But I have now put him on filter.

I will not be able to help myself in replying to his inverted logic if I saw his post.

I don't know if he is playing 3D chess with us or just sitting there eating the pieces :)

Sorry JDAU

My mistake (again).

I should have said

"You have always respected the right of other posters to have a different view to yours re CB's forward guidance and comms so now wont be having a dig at them when they are critical of CB. Caveat. Assuming they are not making things up about what CB said. After all its just a different opinion and I now understand that you are OK with that."

I know you are not calling me thick but I am calling myself thick for not realising your position from the start . You have always had the above position but for some reason I couldnt see that and I wrongly thought your many replies to others who were being critical of CB's forward guidance and comms was you saying they shouldn't have that opinion. I just don't know what I was thinking !

Silly me.

Thank you for your help clearing all this up. I think it's fair to say after our recent interactions, I now see you in a different light.

"Andrew, how was my stance not clear when I wrote it several different ways?"

Sorry JDAU my mistake. I must be a bit thick. And thank you for trying to make it simple for me to understand - but even for me that was too difficult to understand.

I somehow interpreted your many posts in replies to other poster's views on CB's comms and forward guidance, as a being critical of them for having that view of CB.

What we have established is.

1. I'm a bit thick

2. You now respect the right of other posters to have a different view to yours re CB's forward guidance and comms so now wont be having a dig at them when they are critical of CB. After all its just a different opinion and I now know you are OK with that.

All sorted.

"Andrew, how can it be a deflection tactic when I’m in agreement with you that posters can hold different opinions?"

Great so we are in agreement. Its wrong to lie about what CB has said in interviews and you dont have a problem with some posters thinking differently to you re CB's comms so accept they have the right to criticism him on that issue - even though you dont see it that way.

Sorry but for some reason I thought you had a problem with posters being critical of CB's comms and forward guidance. Silly me.

I realise now that you don't and respect their right to have a different view to yours re CB's comm and forward guidance.

So all now on the same page!

"You keep just brushing over the fact that a poster Lied about something the company said and instead have developed a hyper fixation on it being ok for people to have different opinions"

But the main point is about others having the right to have different views and not what one poster may have said. This is just deflection tactics to my main point. As I've said before , lets say another poster did lie about what CB said in an interview. Then that is wrong so I am not ignoring that but that is irrelevant to the views that most have about CB.

But your point has never been that ALL the posters here are all laying about what CB has said in interviews. So my answers to your questions was with respect to what the majority of posters have said they feel re CB's forward guidance and comms. The majority do not need to lie about what CB said as there is a wealth of evidence to show that his comms and forward guidance has been poor.

I feel you are deliberately focusing on what one poster may have said inaccurately about CBs forward guidance to deflect and discredit all the other posters who feel his comms and forward guidance have been poor.

To be honest JDAU I feel it is you who are deflecting my main point and focusing a minor issue by one poster to discredit the view of many on here re CB's poor comms.

I've tried to answer all your questions logically but you ignore my points keep coming back with "yes but one poster lied" and ignoring my main point.

We are just going round in circles so for the benefit of the other posters I think it best we leave it there. This is getting us nowhere

JDAU

Thanks for your reply.

In that case I honestly don't see why you can't see why some are happy to remain invested despite the lack of trust in the management comms.

To your other points.

" I’d personally suggest that it’s rather stupid to remain invested in a company where you don’t trust the management"

Your use of trust here is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Lack of trust in the forward guidance or timescales, Yes. But maybe not lack of trust in the ability for the CEO to deliver a sp increase at some point in the future. It's not stupid to invest in a company that you think the sp will double or treble in 1 to 2 years.

"I just find it strange that no-one has a better idea on where to invest, especially considering how little people seem to believe in the story here"

Again, I think that's a mischaracterisation of many of the supposed "bashers" views. If anyone thinks the sp will rerate then they DO believe in the story here. I think you are mixing up poor comms and forward guidance with investment potential.

"To be 100% crystal clear: I do not care if someone has a different opinion to me"

Ok so here's the different opinion. You are happy with CB's management style and comms and believe there is an investment here. Fair enough. Many are not happy with CB's management style and comms but also think there is an investment here. Hence they are still invested. You have said "you don't care if someone has a different opinion then you" so If you could accept that some see it different to you re CB's management style and comms, then I doubt there would be the constant arguing.

If you looked at what many AIM investors thought of their CEOs I am sure many would have the same critical comments re time lines and forward guidance as many do on here about CB. So the criticism of CB on here is not exceptional but probably standard for many AIM CEOs.

And there it is.

You refuse to answer my point JDAU and keep trying to deflect. You ask a lot of direct questions to me and I have answered them. But refuse to answer my direct question to you as you know where this will take you.

You wont answer my question as the answer is obviously "Yes"

If you accept that the answer is Yes, then have to accept that those who you claim are bashers could also be genuine investors but are just much more critical than you of CB's comms and forward guidance.

JDAU

I've given a comprehensive answer to your questions but you are using "whataboutary" arguments to deflect my answers to your questions. You now claim that you are insulted so will "leave it there". So again no reply to my answer to your question. Are you wanting to leave it there as you know I have made a reasonable point that shows how some can hold two different views and its not all black and white.

For sake of argument, lets say that some posters have lied re what CB has said. Not most or all but some, so you can't keep using that as a deflection argument against my main point.

My main point stands. Do you accept that the statement below can be true for an investor in AIM?

No deflection argument or whataboutary, or I don't want to answer because I'm offended. Just a yes or no to the view below.

"A person can take the view that you can';t trust what the management says re forward guidance ( true for many AIM companies) and have not delivered what they have said (again true for most AIM companies) , but that doesnt mean they wont deliver in the future. It may not be as soon as they say or as good as they say, but if you believe they will deliver and the sp will rise, then why not stay invested. It' not a choice of believing everything they say or.. not believing any thing they say."

"As a serious question Andrew, if you were invested in a company and you genuinely held the view that the management was untrustworthy and they aren’t delivering what they are verbally communicating. Why would you remain invested?"

Answer. If I believed they would deliver then yes I would remain invested . I believe the sp will be 2p+ in 12 months but I dont trust what cb says

You have highlighted my point of nuance with that question and your need for a black and white one dimensional view..

A person can take the view that you can';t trust what the management says re forward guidance ( true for many AIM companies) and have not delivered what they have said (again true for most AIM companies) , but that doesnt mean they wont deliver in the future. It may not be as soon as they say or as good as they say, but if you believe they will deliver and the sp will rise, then why not stay invested. It' not a choice of believing everything they say or.. not believing any thing they say.

Your question highlights my view that you have no nuance and its either black and white for you.

"Ps. I categorically do not accept the often posed view that an investor would be so disgruntled yet remain invested whilst also complaining on a daily basis about it -"

Again highlights a one dimensional view. You are only focusing on one aspect. Those same posters who are disgruntled are talking about one aspect ie cb's timelines and forward guidance. All those "bashers" have all said they think there is potential here for sp appreciation but you ignore that part. Its not black and white.

Btw there was no personal attack on you but an observation. Many who are on the spectrum are normal, high skilled people who are highly intelligent. They just have a different way of cognitive processing but lack nuance and see things in a black and white view..

When you read the exchanges between JDAU and the other posters it just boils down to the fact JDAU believes what CB says but decides to label those that dont trust CB as non shareholders or manipulators via multiple accounts.

JDAU talks about logic and evidence, but I would say that there is a lot of evidence to support the view that you can't believe what CB says whether that is in interviews or even sometimes in RNS. JDAU has repeatedly said that he belives what CB says in interviews, which is his choice, but the idea that someone who doesnt is a basher is a rather reductive and over simplistic view imho

JDAU doesn't seem to accept that you can have a different view to his view unless you have an agenda.

I wasn't going to say this as JDAU will see this as a snidy dig - but its not. I think he may be slightly on the spectrum a bit. I know of people who i've worked with who are high functionating intelligent adults who are completely normal but have a binary view on everything and who can't hold two competing views in their head at the same time. This remind me of JDAU who has no nuance in his thinking ie you can be an investor here and also believe the sp will go higher but dont' trust CB's previous forward guidance and are therefore critical of his comms.

A reasonable view to have imho but too nuanced for those that see things in black and white.

"I'm one of the few people who wants to stick to the facts given in company interviews/news releases."

Ha Ha "The facts in interviews and news releases" ! LOL

Isnt that where we all came in on this debate

He's obviously just on a wind up !

OK So you now decide what "deserved criticism is"

The "clear alternative" comment was your comment and I only used it to show that many still believe that its worth investing here. I am obviously not saying there arnt any other investments but you chose to deliberately misrepresent my comment. I thought you hated it when people did that !!

I'm not getting confused but its clear you are struggling to make a coherent argument against many other posters comments. Keep stamping your feet and saying "I'm right I'm right" is not an argument. If you feel that's unfair then you have no self awareness of how you are coming over.

Sorry JDUA but your replies are now becoming non sequitur.

I'll leave it there, but let you have the last word as I know how important that is to you.