Member Info for asimpleinvestor

@steakpie We’re on a share forum to discuss data, and the data today shows a significant shift in the capital structure. Firstly, official LSE volume today was around 1.7 billion shares, not 11.5 billion. Trading 3.5% of the company isn't the "massive" volume shift needed to clear a 50-billion-share count; it's just a standard high-liquidity day.

As for being invested, I sold my holding at the open this morning at 0.0315p before the full weight of the placing kicked in. Nothing in today's RNS suggests a positive "re-rating" is imminent when you’ve just added 16.6 billion shares at a discount. The "pointer" won't move until we see tens of billions in volume to absorb that new supply. Success at the wellhead is a great prospect, but the math of the share count remains the dominant mechanical factor for the price and it isn't in positive territory to warrant reinvesting yet. It’s interesting how a difference of opinion based on raw numbers causes such a reaction no need for the "alternative facts" on volume!

@TT1981 We only have to look at Helium One (HE1) to see how this plays out. They hit a massive discovery at Itumbula with 5.5% helium double our target back in 2024. Yet, two years later, they’re still doing fundraises (most recently in March) to bridge the gap to full production. HE1's share count exploded to 10 billion in the process, and that weight has acted as a permanent ceiling on the price despite "First Gas" now finally flowing in the US.

Flow rates at Sagebrush-1 next week would be great news, but they are just the start of a very expensive infrastructure journey. To get that gas into tubes, QHE will need gathering systems and plants that £5m won't cover. Comparing us to HE1 shows the reality: even with a world-class discovery, the "friction" of 50 billion shares is a mathematical hurdle that sentiment alone can't jump. We’re going to need years of massive, sustained volume to churn through this paper before we see a "five-bagger" hold its ground. So currently QHE and Prem have that in common, neither has at this juncture produced anything.

Well, they can buy 3,125 shares for a quid

@Troajan Prem is a good example, comparing QHE to PREM actually reinforces the "friction" argument rather than debunking it; PREM became so weighed down by its share count that it was forced into a 1:10 consolidation in October 2025 just to make the share price manageable again. Before that "reset," PREM faced the same mathematical ceiling where billions in volume were required just to move a single tick. Currently, QHE has nearly six times the share count of the post-consolidation PREM, meaning that to match the relative liquidity of a busy day on PREM, QHE would need to shift over 10 billion shares in a single session. While a £60m–£75m market cap is achievable in theory, PREM’s history shows that the path there is usually paved with massive dilution and volatility, requiring the total share capital to churn multiple times over to wash out the placing overhang. Without that "astronomical" volume, the sheer mass of 50 billion shares acts as a mechanical anchor on the price.

@djwall1s -I sold as soon as the market opened because I could see how things would play out. Why have I spoken here since? Simply because I can. The only person who decides if I can post here is the moderator, and what I’ve written is specifically about the share and entirely factual, so it doesn’t break any rules. If that bothers you, you need to understand that not everything is within your control so by all means have a tantrum, but it won't change my posting.

@westernglory Your estimate of a £50 million market cap is off once today’s RNS and the enlarged share capital are factored in. To achieve a five-bagger now, it would need to hit £75 million. The point is that a five-bagger isn’t just about sentiment, but about massive absorption. Reaching a £75m market cap would likely require the stock to trade multiple times its total issued share capital in a short period to clear out the “cheap” shares from the recent £5m placing. Without volumes in the tens of billions, the price remains weighed down by the 50,000,000,000 shares in existence. In a company with only 100 million shares, buying 10 million (10%) would cause a big price spike. In QHE, buying 10 million shares is just 0.02% of the company, which barely moves the price unless matched by tens of billions of shares in demand. To see a significant gain, say 20% or more, volumes would probably need to exceed 5–10 billion shares in a single session to counter the drag of such a huge share count.

To hit a 500% gain, the stock would probably need to trade around 100% to 200% of its total share capital (50bn–100bn shares) over several weeks, effectively churning the shareholder base from those who bought at 0.03p to those willing to hold at higher prices. Today’s total volume after the RNS was 1.76 billion shares, which, while sounding big, is only about 3.5% of the company showing just how much more liquidity is needed to reach the “tens of billions” required for the move described.

Of course it matters as to get to that level the volume you would require is astronomical

Your argument is misplaced on so many levels. Even the fact that BP has less than half the shares in issue than QHE does is the smallest of them

Do we have the revenue and profit of BP?

Too many shares in issue now for it to be worth investing in. Volume would need to be huge just to move the pointer up anywhere decent.

@Newuncle Wrong forum

@sparhawk How does that work if the actual changes are still 2–4 years away? What we’re seeing now is just a temporary shift in sentiment until the information fully settles, at which point it should correct itself. If it remains low until 2028–2030, then you’d have a case, but if we see a retrace from today’s drop in the coming days, your assumption doesn’t hold.

I'd be amazed if anybody still believes anything Trump says never mind see the markets rebound off his words.

Nice 23% rise for ITM today @troublesome

@sparhawk In 2-4 years time (2028-2030)

It doesn’t seem logical, but that’s two milestones missed now, and whether it was intentional or not, logic suggests things aren’t looking too bright.

@Ssccss re quote "Following the publication of the accounts for 2024/25 along with a series of other steps required by the Company, a request will be made to the London Stock Exchange for PPP shares to return to trading on the Exchange. At the point of application, the Company will publish an updated timeline to give shareholders a better understanding of the actions required and potential timelines. Should the Company progress with the proposed Reverse Take Over (RTO) as previously announced, this may preclude the Company from returning to trading until the RTO process concludes."

The key point: the company is not following through on its own stated sequence

They said:

1. Publish accounts

2. Complete required steps

3. Apply to LSE

4. Publish timeline

We are stuck between steps 2 and 3, with no explanation. The lack of communication is now the biggest issue, not the accounts.

Once a Main Market company submits its formal application to lift a suspension, the process is largely in the hands of the FCA and the company’s sponsor, and the timelines are fairly predictable. The sponsor first confirms to the FCA that the company is fully compliant with the Listing Rules and that there are no undisclosed issues or ongoing transactions such as an RTO that would prevent trading from resuming. The company hasn't confirmed if they RTO is going ahead yet, as they stated previously that they would relist and regain market confidence before progressing with tan RTO so this isn't a barrier.

Once the FCA receives the application, the review period typically takes between five and fifteen working days, during which the regulator may ask for clarifications or additional confirmations. If everything is clean, the FCA lifts the suspension and trading resumes at the next market open. In practice, from the moment the application is submitted, shareholders would normally expect reinstatement within two to four weeks in a straightforward case. If nothing happens after six to eight weeks from the date of application, that’s usually the point where investors start to worry, because delays at that stage often indicate either unresolved regulatory questions or the possibility that a larger transaction such as an RTO is being progressed behind the scenes and if it is the RTO suggests the company has backtracked on its word with regards to lifting suspension prior to an RTO to allow those investors who don't want to be invested a chance to exit.

@Dorfan You're highlighting the "asymmetric" threat, but we have to look at the strategic logic. Even if Iran developed a device, the 7,150-mile geographic barrier remains their biggest hurdle. For a nuclear deterrent to be effective, it must be credible meaning it’s launched from sovereign territory as a clear signal of state power. Covert smuggling is the domain of non-state actors, not a nation-state looking for survival; a smuggled detonation offers no "deterrent" because it invites immediate, total retaliation the moment the isotopic signature is traced back to Tehran. If there were a genuine nuclear threat to the US homeland today, the far more likely vector isn't a high-risk 7,000-mile smuggling operation from Iran, but rather a device constructed within the US using domestic materials. Given recent reports of missing nuclear-grade material and the disappearance of specialised nuclear personnel from US labs in late 2025 and early 2026, the "low-tech" threat is much closer to home. It is technically and logistically easier to exploit existing security gaps in our own domestic supply chain than to successfully move a weapon halfway around the world into one of the most heavily monitored air and sea spaces on Earth.

@iDoji Has it escaped your notice that Trump having nuclear weapons now could pose more potential problems than Iran possibly having them in the future? U.S. weapons can reach anywhere in the world, while Iran doesn’t even have an ICBM or a bomber that can make that distance, so even if it developed a nuclear weapon, it couldn’t reach the U.S., which means Iran isn’t really a direct nuclear threat to the country.

When the US experiences the mother of all recessions, which according to signs seems to be approaching rapidly, what impact do you think it will have on the rest of the world and the global banking system?

In the meantime, any sales will be at the spot price which currently is elevated so money in the coffers to keep things ticking over.