Member Info for asimpleinvestor

Quote "You seem to have become the self-appointed spokesperson for the whole board."

@Newuncle You’ve made 350 posts here in the last month compared to my 48, yet you have the gall to suggest I’ve become the self-appointed spokesperson for the whole board and accuse me of pomposity. Take a look in the mirror, mate you’ve posted over six times more than I have, putting you at the top of the league with ZagEgypts 304 posts when it comes to self-appointed cheerleaders.

You have been blaming the TG group for FCA investigations over the course of the suspension now you're suggesting its past governance issues that will have brought the company to the attention of the FCA. You need to make your mind it who it is you wish to blame or does that just change with the wind just as with everything else.

"If one repeats the same message more than 3 times does that automatically mean its right.

Thats what I thought no."

@ZagEgypt Never was a truer word spoken, but you’re guilty of constantly repeating the same inane drivel you can’t back up as fact, despite people repeatedly correcting you using information provided by the company itself. So I can only assume you include yourself in that quote.

72% not 60%

@ZagEgypt quote "Not touching the RTO issue as the company are going a different route so as it stands there is little point discussing that."

From the RNS dated 23rd April 2026 quote "Nonetheless, Limnytska is a very material opportunity and one the Board believes can offer material value to shareholders. ***However, the board is also mindful of the dilution that would result from the acquisition on terms announced previously.*** Accordingly, the Board is now reviewing the possibility of acquiring or farming in to a minority stake.

→Given the scale of Pennpetro, this would almost certainly still be an RTO and be subject to publication of a prospectus and shareholder approval←

So which route is the company going, as it appears clear cut given the scale of Pennpetro this would ALMOST CERTAINLY STILL BE AN RTO. I'm surprised you didn't notice what was contained within an RNS just one day old.

So let’s return to my original question regarding dilution and the assumed price at relisting (if it occurs). I’m not asking for a rough estimate, as the figures are clearly provided in their documentation, and you’ve mentioned several times that you’ve been keeping up with the details, so please do so.

You blame me for keyboard dyslexia anything else you’d like to pin on me? It’s easy to swap two digits by mistake. Now, maybe you could answer my question about dilution and how many shares you think will be in issue when this is relisted. What do you believe the relisting price will be, how many shares will be issued to cover the RTO, and what will the overall total look like along with price taking into account for the RTO to go ahead the MCAP needs to be three times the current level. I have a suspicion there will be no answers forthcoming from you, as you don't have the mental capacity to think that far ahead.

@troublesome You’ve shown yourself to be toxic and hypocritical, making accusations you won’t support and suggesting actions you won’t take yourself. Until you can prove you’re worth my time, I have nothing more to say except to remind you of your hypocrisy.

It seems we can all agree, based on Gray1's suggestion, that you're acting like a troll with nothing valuable to contribute to this board. You expect from others what you’re not willing to give yourself, which is the definition of hypocrisy. So enjoy wallowing in it, and expect to be treated accordingly until you learn to offer what you demand from others.

Over an hour ago, you said you were too busy to deal with this. In that time, you could have presented the evidence to support your claim. Since it still hasn’t been provided, the obvious conclusion is that it doesn’t exist. So, are you going to own up and apologise, or admit that instead of proving me a liar, you’ve shown yourself to be the real one?

If you won’t apologize, then back up your claim there’s no middle ground if you want to be taken seriously. Right now, you’re making a mockery of yourself and your character. Is that really how you want to be seen on this board? As you can see, I don't back down and as an former public figure I understand perceptions more than most.

A politician’s actions are always subject to public perception and trial by media. This is no secret and often comes up when discussing other political figures. You tend to assume the worst about right-wing politicians and the best about left-wing ones. That’s just how public perception works, so mentioning it doesn’t make me a liar.

"We shouLd leave the abolition of nuclear weapons up to Jesus Trump and his acolytes !!!!"

So that’s your non-answer to the suggestion that we should abolish all nuclear weapons. It’s unlikely to happen under Trump, especially with alleged reports that his own military had to take the nuclear codes from him to prevent their use against Iran.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/explosive-report-claims-trump-tried-152804924.html

Now, regarding your allegation against me, do you plan to support your claim, or will you be publicly apologising for making it?

No, I didn’t. I said he was investigated during COVID for drinking with colleagues after work, and I posted this link to back up the claim. Something I always do when I make a claim.

https://news.sky.com/story/beergate-memo-calls-into-question-starmers-claim-that-he-did-not-break-lockdown-rules-12607392

Now back up you claim that I am a 'proven liar'.

"You know what I know, that's all that really matters."

Nope, if I knew, I wouldn’t be asking. You’ve made the claim, so now you need to back it up. If you can’t, what does that say about you? Your integrity and honesty are on the line, and you’re basically saying you have neither.

The Non-Proliferation Treaty has been in place for 56 years, signed by most countries that possess nuclear weapons. However, the abolition of these weapons is a completely different issue. After more than half a century, there’s been little progress toward abolition, and in fact, some signatories have left the treaty, making it clear that this path isn’t working. So the question remains: how do you propose eliminating nuclear weapons worldwide?

"I've seen the evidence that's all that matters to me personally."

Go ahead and share. You made the claim on a public forum, so the evidence should be shared there too. If you can’t do that, then it’s your character in question, not mine.

@troublesome The link you provided was about non-proliferation, not abolition. There’s a clear difference between the two.

"I have a total lack of respect for those asking the questions & increasingly yourself (a proven liar)."

I haven't viewed any evidence of your claim. Do you often defame peoples character without evidence?

@troublesome , that’s a cop-out. You started it and made your position clear, which means you’re already engaging with them. A responsible person would see it through instead of backing out and taking a Trump-style approach of criticizing people when you don’t have an answer.

"It requires skilful diplomacy and a common will that takes time, patience and a realisation that its the only way that true peace can be achieved without the ever present threat of mutual annihilation."

Have you considered taking your own advice when choosing your battles on here. Or do you prefer the constant need to have your finger on that button.

@troublesome Gray1 asked for a two-part answer to a problem, not just the first part, which is the easier bit. The harder part is the latter. He asked, “What outcome would you like to see from this troublesome, and how would you go about achieving it?” You answered, “No nuclear weapons anywhere.” Now you need to explain how that goal could be achieved.

This is an argument I often present on both local and national issues; what needs changing, how that change could happen, at what cost, and who might lose out for it to be realised. So please respond to Gray1 as an adult and explain how you would achieve a world without nuclear weapons in a context where nuclear proliferation has existed across nations for 75 years.