Member Info for Blubay

But you did advise everyone else to hold, buy, top up, average down throughout the recent period, on the basis of your claims to professional experience in the markets and your certainty that the CLN investors would not possibly convert shares so cheaply and would certainly wait for higher prices, so presumably you did follow your own advice?

No Toffers, I haven't reinvested and won't be investing during the current period of price decay and operational uncertainty attached to the CLN structure unless there's some significant news to consider. I'm happy retaining my capital recovered at 0.9p and I remain optimistic about the company's future prospects once this is cleared.

Take the point about NEDs, and you're right that can be window dressing but I think we can all agree that LB probably didn't mastermind the global acquisitions or financing strategy on her own, which are the key things keeping the company going. She'll get her shot at proving the Rukwa project through appraisal. If that doesn't work out she'll probably get to run her own prospect and rig hire company via East Africa Holdings, while HE1 moves over to a more hands off project acquisition and finance strategy. The only advantage of running an exploration company on AIM is that there's always plenty of periodic hopium to drive sentiment trading liquidity for capital raises.

The HE1 board is actually more qualified and experienced than comparator small cap in the sector. For sure LB acts as a front in the CEO role, where her technical expertise is most relevant to operations (more of a COO), but the backup she has in terms of experience in capital markets, project finance, gas field commercialisation etc is exceptional.

Yesterday’s faked memo didn’t cause the day’s trading or spike liquidity but it’s all part of the same campaigns. You’d see the same thing the other way with leaked short reports or vindictive law suits. They’re usually first posted by burner accounts but it’s good to be aware of who then amplifies them. The version posted here yesterday (removed) was interesting because it was reposted today (removed) with a subtle edit to the price wording that couldn’t have been a copy error.

Conversion is at the ‘higher’ of two options (i) 92.5% of the ten day VWAP, or (ii) the lowest single day VWAP in that ten day period. When (i) drops below (ii) there’s a small catch up lull unless, as you say, there was a sudden conversion. They haven’t moved enough shares yet to prepare for another tranche conversion and may have taken a foot off the gas temporarily while the price stabilises above 0.4p.

There’s a lull partly because the ten day VWAP has converged with the lowest single day VWAP so the conversion price is pegged temporarily (around 0.33p), which allows for some price stabilisation. They may be able to drip out the third tranche in a more orderly way above 0.4 this week and next if so.

I was rather hoping you were going to substantiate some of the claims you made today with evidence but I note that my polite requests are being removed within a minute of posting now, which is interesting in itself.

See also 'anitabruzzese0' on ADVFN

As I've said, I'm keen to reinvest the capital that I recovered at 0.9p as soon as the market is back on an even keel and an operational plan for near term production is back in process, which I assume will be sometime in Q4. I'm very comfortable with that stress free position. If there's other news then I'll reconsider my position.

Remember, you're the one telling everyone to buy, hold, top up, average down throughout a sustained period of entirely predictable price decay, not me. I don't know what your reasons are for doing that.

No, I'm interested in re-investing the capital I had invested for some years, and that I chose to protect at 0.9p, once stability returns and there is an operational plan for near term production in Colorado. It's not difficult to understand.

It's a public discussion board not a members club. I'm interested in the company and interested in investing in it as soon as stability returns. There is no shareholder qualification for chatting. Why would such a thing matter?

Shareholders were given that choice to vote at the meeting, either the CLN agreement or an imposed cash box alternative (although discount level unknown).

“ why pay attention to people you don’t know ”

Why indeed?

Conversion price has been dropping about 2-3% per day, although that trend may flatten out for a bit if the lowest day formula flips the ten day formula.

Think your base share numbers are a bit out John. There were about 6.2bn shares prior to the agreement, 6.4bn after the retail offer, and now 7bn. But agree there are probably 2-3bn more shares to convert.

Best outcome would probably have been for shareholders to reject the CLN vote and opt for the threatened cashbox structure with no retail offer (if we assume that would mean getting the same £10m cash for a one day dilution of 30% or so). Turkeys voting for Christmas unfortunately. How quickly the CLN holders can convert now really depends on market liquidity, no way of knowing, but my guess is they push on through as quickly as they can. Just a guess.

It reached 27/29p then, which I think is roughly equivalent to about 2.7p per share now, or maybe 1.85p after the anticipated CLN dilution is complete.

I think it was more like £178m in 2021 on anticipation of discovery at Tai, which turned out not to be proven

0.34p on Friday 5 September might not be a bad call, based on current trends. There's a potential reversal coming up next week (between the ten day VWAP versus lowest day conversion formula). That might produce a price stability plateau around that level, at least temporarily. Just a guess.