Member Info for asimpleinvestor

"Its Hydrogen they are after so number of helium wells is irrelevant. This could go to £4 per share easily."

Explain where your estimated £4 comes from rather than just pluck a figure from the air.

More fluff

No

@Oneknows you do realize your post doesn’t make sense. If, as you claim, “it’s a win or a loss for me,” then you’d first need to buy some in order to win or lose. If you have bought some, then you’ve made a trade and owe me £1000. If you haven’t made a trade, then you have nothing to win or lose with. I wonder if you actually see the flaw of your argument.

Hmmm!

Seriously? You’re trying to suggest that nobody on any of the boards posts when they’re top-slicing, selling, topping up, or block buying or selling shares. I’m willing to bet that if I checked your own posting history, @Oneknows, I’d find posts where you’ve mentioned trades you’ve made or planned to make. It happens every day on virtually every LSE forum.

So what’s the flow rate if, as you suggest, it’s flowing freely?

@nookie After todays RNS this suggests not

@Oneknows how do you trade the back of a share that has virtually stood still for a number of years. There is no volume to trade the back off this share. Todays 16 trades is higher than the average over the last year.

"wrong as usual.......defamation can be bought civil and criminal (where the act of could cause an individual personal harm or jeopardy, think accusing someone of being a paedophile covers that as has been proved before)) while Libel is recorded, permanent defamation (written, online)."

I haven't accused anybody of being a paedophile, again you're confusing me with somebody else. Which brings me back to stalking and now making false claims which of course I'm copying and reporting as we go.

"Until he loses it completely hence that vile post he made about me. Same on HEX this morning. Oh well hope you all enjoy your bank holiday sunshine and make money."

Lose what? My cool? Not me I’m more often accused of being emotionless than of “losing it.” You must have me confused with someone else. My posting history is out there for everyone to see, and you won’t find a heated post, let alone a “seeing red” one, lol. Good luck with your garden; we’re currently landscaping our kitchen garden and tying it in with the orchard so it’s easier to access from the kitchen door using permaculture principles, since right now it’s a bit of a trek to use it.

@SamiRZ You are going off on a tangent and misattributing the points being made. I mentioned that a share consolidation is needed to take the high number of low-denomination shares off the market.

You responded by shouting that a consolidation doesn't change the Market Cap something I never disputed. What you are failing to grasp is that while it doesn't change the Value, it fundamentally changes the Liquidity Mechanics.

You claim consolidations are just for fundraising or NASDAQ compliance. That is incorrect. They are frequently used to move a stock away from 'penny' status specifically to improve trading efficiency and reduce the 'noise' of billions of units.

The reality today is we don't have a consolidation we have 50 billion shares. Today, we have traded over 400 million units, yet the price hasn't moved from 0.0305p.

If the 'product' didn't matter and only the cash mattered, £120,000 of buying power would have cleared the 0.03p level hours ago. It hasn't, because the supply is too vast. You are arguing about what a consolidation does to a company's value, while I am explaining why the lack of one makes this structure a 'freight train' that is almost impossible to move with retail-level cash. Are you following now, or are you going to continue arguing against points I didn't even make?

@RonnieR Flow rate?

@Montmuzard I'm not claiming that either; it was SamiRZ who used the HE1 3.30p spike as a direct comparison to justify why the current 16.6 billion share dilution in QHE was 'BS'.

My correction was purely on the mechanics: comparing a 1.8 billion share dilution (HE1) to a 16.6 billion share dilution (QHE) is a false equivalence. You say a move to a £75m MCAP (0.15p) is a 'seven-bagger,' and while that sounds great, you also correctly noted it requires tens of millions of pounds in fresh capital.

The point I am making is about Liquidity Density today we have traded 365 million shares (a massive number of 'units'). the monetary value of those trades is only £110,000 the price is currently 0.0305p (unmoved).

If £110,000 of buying power can’t move the needle by even a single 'tick' because it is being absorbed by the 50 billion share 'sponge,' then you can calculate for yourself how long it takes to find the 'tens of millions' required to reach your £75m target.

I’m not scaring anyone; I’m pointing out that in a 50-billion-share structure, you don't 'miss the boat' on an RNS morning because there is simply too much 'product' for the price to gap up like a tightly held stock and hence my original comment. It's math, not a conspiracy.

@Cyrox It isn't just about cash; it's about the mechanics of the trade. A trade requires a product, and that product is shares. Without shares, you have no trade and the cash stays in your pocket.

In this instance, it involves liquidity. The more 'product' there is on the market, the higher the volume needed to move it. If there is an oversupply—as we have here with 50 billion shares—the value per unit decreases. To move the price, that 'product' needs to be bought and 'put in a cupboard' (held long-term) to create a tight market. Cash is only effective when the product is scarce; when it is as common as grains of sand on a beach, your cash has very little 'lifting power.'

The other way to look at it is via denominations. Think of the company's value as a pile of cash that has been split into tiny, fractional notes. Nobody wants to buy a loaf of bread with a million individual notes; they prefer a single note of higher value. Unfortunately, our 'cash' is currently in a tiny, fractional format. The only way to create a 'bigger note' (a higher share price) is by removing the small ones from circulation. But when someone 'opens a safe' and floods the market with 16 billion more tiny notes, it forces the value of every other note down again.

Are you following the mechanics now? 50 billion shares isn't just a number; it is the physical weight the cash has to lift. Or do you still think the product doesn't matter and only the cash stays in your pocket because it has nowhere to go?

What is needed before good news lands is a share consolidation to take the high number of low denominational shares off the market and to create higher denominational shares that are lighter and more easily traded.

Quote "Try to read messages fully and don't always think you are correct nor superior.. another narcissistic trait!!"

Unless you are suitably qualified to make such medical assertions, doing so is a defensive trait in itself. Including a personal insult in every post that disagrees with your view is a distraction from the data and—to be honest—is like water off a duck's back. It simply appears immature; it’s better to stay on topic and leave the playground insults behind.

Regarding the 12:16 post: I cannot confirm or deny what was said as it is simply a 'green box' of a filtered user.

If we can return to the mechanics: my point remains that 50 billion shares create a massive supply wall. Today's volume is high, but the monetary value is low. Until the 'engine' (cash flow) is strong enough to move the 'vehicle' (the 50bn share count), the price remains pinned regardless of sentiment. If you have the data to prove the opposite, please share the math. Otherwise, the insults don't change the spreadsheet

"You claim we won't be able to buy near 0.03p if commerciality is confirmed."

I haven't claimed anything of the sort; I think you must be confusing me with another poster. I previously stated: 'With 50 billion shares in circulation, there would be plenty of time to grab a few if a favourable RNS drops on Tuesday without missing out. Given the current overhang, it would take massive volume to move the ticker.'

My point remains purely mechanical. You are now suggesting a '5x' return is the target. For QHE to 5x from here (reaching 0.15p), the Market Cap must move from £15m to £75m.

To achieve that, the market has to absorb billions of shares from the recent 0.03p placement. Today’s activity is the perfect example of the 'weight' I am talking about: we have traded 310 million shares, yet the monetary value is only £95,000, and the price has barely flickered. That is the definition of an 'overhang.'

If £95k of buying power only moves 0.6% of the register, you can calculate for yourself how many tens of millions of pounds in fresh capital are needed to push this to 0.15p. It isn't 'unbelievable,' it’s just basic arithmetic. I’m not saying it can’t happen eventually; I’m saying the 50-billion-share structure means you won't 'miss the boat' in a single morning

@SamiRZ You didn't have me filtered as you can't see names when they're filtered and my name wasn't mentioned by the previous posters. Lets get that out of the way before we continue.

The overhang on HE1 was less than an eighth of the overhang currently affecting QHE, which is why it can’t be used as an example. You claim the number of shares is immaterial yet use a dilution involving an increased number of shares as your example. You can’t have it both ways.

HE1 Overhang (2024): Their placing was for roughly 1.8 billion shares.

QHE Overhang (2026): Our current placing is 16.6 billion shares.

The QHE overhang is roughly 9.2 times larger than the one HE1 had to digest. HE1 example is not a valid comparison for a "heavy" structure like QHE.

You are correctly stating that MCAP is the vital metric, but you are incorrectly assuming that 50 billion shares don’t create a mechanical ceiling on price movement. Remember what the calculation is that gives you MCAP. It isn't price alone it has another part of the equation - shares in issue.

1. The £5m Cash vs. the 50bn SII:

While £5m cash is great for the balance sheet, it was bought with 16.6 billion new shares. You say the dilution is 'horrendous' but then ignore its effect. In trading mechanics, those billions of shares are 'supply.' For the price to move from 0.03p to just 0.06p, the market has to find enough buyers to absorb billions of shares from placers who are currently 'flipping' (as evidenced by today's high volume but low monetary value of £85k).

2. The HE1 Fantasy:

You claim we won't be able to buy near 0.03p if commerciality is confirmed. However, when HE1 hit 3.30p, its 'vehicle' only weighed 3.4 billion shares. To get QHE’s 50-billion-share freight train to move to 3.30p, you need a market cap of £1.65 Billion. That isn't 'trolling'; it is a mathematical fact.

3. The Mechanics of a 'Buy':

You call it a 'fantastic buy,' but a buy is only fantastic if the price can actually move. With 50 billion shares in issue, QHE requires massive, institutional-level monetary value to move even a fraction of a penny. Today’s 89 trades totalling £85k is just retail churn; it doesn't even begin to dent the wall of 50 billion shares.

Stick to the insults if you must, but they won't change the denominator on the spreadsheet. 50 billion shares is a weight that no amount of 'hype' can easily lift If you believe what I say is wrong give me your calculation and metrics of what is right with an example of volume mcap, trades needed and metrics to increase the shares value by just 10% in a single sitting and don't bother with "it only takes one big buyer," that a "big buyer" (Institutional) wouldn't buy on the open market and drive the price up 10% against themselves; they would use a dark pool or a block trade.

@SamiRZ You're referencing the February 2024 HE1 spike from 0.25p to 3.30p, but you're ignoring the only thing that actually matters: the denominator.

When HE1 hit that 3.30p peak, they had 3.4 billion shares in issue. That discovery gave them a market cap of £112 million. That was a fair value for a world-class 5% helium find.

Now look at QHE. After the recent placing, we have 50 billion shares. For QHE to hit your 3.30p 'dream' price, the market cap has to reach £1.65 Billion. Are you seriously suggesting that a commercial update at Sagebrush makes QHE as valuable as a FTSE 250 industrial giant?

Even if QHE announced the exact same discovery as HE1 tomorrow and reached that same £112m valuation, the share price would only be 0.22p. That is the 'mechanics' you call trolling. You're holding a ticket for a motorbike (HE1) and trying to board a freight train (QHE) expecting the same acceleration. It doesn't work that way. 50 billion shares is a wall, not a springboard.