Member Info for bluerill

well, I'm not sure there's something 'going on', but the afternoon turnaround, especially considering the spanking US share were and are taking, was certainly impressive. There don't seem to be any large prints after the close, but there was steady buying over the day so perhaps Canaccord is finally earning their fees and generating some buying interest out of the States.

dominate, huh? Well, surely better a wanna-be dictator than an ethics-free supplicant, right alfa?

wow. definitely not stupid

Thanks so much for that Sanchez. All that phoney maturity, back-handed compliments and thinly-disguised insults. Plus priceless advice on how I might be a better person, all while having no interest in a battle with me! You're a classy guy. And yet, you still somehow manage(shock!) to avoid the central point I am making: I know what I know and what I know is all the available public information points to a rushed, unprofessional selldown by Bushveld of its IES stake and the resulting diminishing of the relationship between these 2 companies. That is an important narrative that IES shareholders should be aware of. Yet there has been a consistent and often aggressively personal response from a group - including, or have you forgotten already, you, my dear Sanchez - that I have discovered absolutely evangelise Fortune and Bushveld, towards me. Broadly speaking, I would have put that in the 'all's fair.....' bucket except that THIS IS THE INVINITY BOARD and the rhetoric against me has almost entirely constituted Bushveld apolgia (is that a word, Sanchez? Probably not, but its hard sometimes as I am only 'not stupid') and not relevant to IES. As for your paranoia, seriously, go pound sand. Try posting anything critical of Bushveld sometime and then come talk to me.

Mate, you don't know from tirades. My comments were considered and thorough. What they were NOT were yet more ass licking aimed in your direction, so I have to assume that anything other than a rapturous embrace of your sudden appearance constitutes a 'tirade'. As for 'unsubstantiated', I showed my work. I can't help it if you can't distinguish between 'passion' and 'blind loyalty'. The rest of what you shared is excess to need and/or just distraction.

oooh, forgot. One more: 7/7. I never, ever sought out this 'fight'. I offered my view on why BMN was selling in order to reassure genuine Invinity shareholders that this 'strategic' shareholder was likely NOT selling due to a reversal in their views on our company. However, because this dared to offer informed information that may have reflected poorly on Bushveld, the response from the bushveld brigade here, led by Alfa, was ferocious and absolutely uncompromising. Since I know I understand the merged company as well or better than anyone and has helped encourage buying when the shares made lows last year, I'm sorry but I didn't take kindly to essentially being called a liar.

1/1. LOL. I guess I should be flattered that the big guns were called out. BBN is, as many here will know already, the biggest Bushveld cheerleader out there. 2/2. As a result, I don't believe for a microsecond that he has 'started to build a position' in IES. That, and his (don't get me wrong, very welcome) collegiate tone are meant, obviously, to act as something of a narcotic and make his sudden appearance here seem as innocent as possible; 3/3. BBN, I see your 'long period invested in the markets' and raise you a 35 year career of professional experience, so there's that; 4/4. Net/net: no amount of tweeting or hopeful speculation about what Siemen's presence with Invinity may now mean for Bushveld, can or will change the facts as they lie: Bushveld sold down their stake in Invinity at a point in time, and for reasons, completely at odds with their original intentions at the RTO. That fact firstly, did real and lasting damage to our share price (weakest part of your tome, BBM. For instance, how the heck do you know where the option might have been struck if Bushveld hadn't sold so poorly? It could easily have been above £2 or even higher) and secondly, and much more importantly, undergirds the very reasonable, informed argument that BMN's decision to divest was not taken proactively, but rather because Bushveld and Fortune were forced to, and the relationship with IES is objectively no longer what it once was and likely never will be again. 5/5. I have already provided my detailed thinking on this final point, so I will not belabour the narrative. What is relevant at this point however, is that this view is plain and simple apostasy for Fortunistas and is 100% the reason why BBN has suddenly appeared, no matter how graciously he may present himself. 6/6. Despite putting all that to rights, I am however very prepared to let this be my final word on this subject should others do the same, unless and until we receive any new information.

Yeah, I guess you must 'of' indeed. Sigh.....

well, you've been told wrong and I think we can let objective reality be the judge and not your 'visit' to avalon 2 years ago when the world was a completely different place. otherwise, bye

spare me the flaccid shout from the sideline, audio. This is important stuff and you need to see that and pick a side instead of appealing to god so you can go back to trying to benefit from other people's work. I'll stop when we it's appropriate and not a moment sooner.

Final word: although I completely stand by what I have written both publicly and privately, it needs to be emphasised here: reprinting private messages in order to try and somehow embarrass or worse, someone who aggressively disagrees with you, is pretty much the slimiest thing anyone can do in this message board/opinion game, not least because no one reading it can ever be sure that it wasn't doctored or even made up from whole cloth in the first place. Out of order on steroids I'd say.

Following on: other than not joining in the hallelujah chorus and praising the righteous genius of Fortune and providing an alternative narrative based on my knowledge of capital markets, Inviity and real events that have happened in the real world, gimme one thing I've 'raved' about Alfa. Mindless putz

thankyou, GKahn. It is a small issue in the overall scheme of things of course, but I have been in markets a long time and I have rarely seen such slavish devotion to a company and its management as I have with Fortune and Bushveld but because there are a non-negligible number of posters here who own both shares, their cultish behaviour has become our problem to some extent. When BMN unceremoniously dumped their stake in IES and drove our share price down, you would have thought it would be obvious to those people that at least at that point, trying to come on this board and somehow spin Bushveld's actions in a positive light or really commenting on BMN at all, might no longer be appropriate. Its nice to have support. As for Alfa, since my private message to him that he has reprinted is precisely consistent with what I have written here publicly, I can only assume that it is the actions of a bitter person who has lost the argument and so resorts to ad hominem attacks. So I have to ask, Who's the nutjob in this scenario?

Maybe you should thought about that months ago alfa, when you initially reached out to ME privately in the hopes of co-ordinating messaging, you flaming hypocrite. As for 'getting you to stop posting', that's just a lie. My (until now) private attempt was to get you to recognise that this is not the Bushveld board in the first place and that if you continue to ignore that fact, I would have no choice but to embarrass you and talk some truth about BMN you doubtless would not like. But you persist so I will explain again: you are simply wrong and the more you write the wrong-er you get. You know nothing about this deal nor how Siemens was 'looking' at it. V supply of any description was an afterthought because of what has already been reported on this board and as I explained, the clear EVIDENCE is Bushveld/Fortune had NOTHING to do with structuring or negotiating this deal in any way. Attempting to big-up Bushveld here is getting embarrassing. There are important reasons BMN's share price has so desperately languished. Mick Davis did not choose FAR's assets over Bushveld's by accident and BMN did not sell their shares in Invinity and effectively abandon its dream of being a 'fully integrated producer' because their work was done with IES or any other such nonsense. Davis chose FAR and Fortune was forced to sell his Invinity stake for the same suite of reasons and THAT's what the BMN is screaming at you but you're too far gone to hear. Now I say again: this is the IES board and no matter our (deep) differences, you have little standing to keep attempting to promote another company which has increasingly little to do with Invinity and has in fact done some real damage recently to its capital structure and share price.

Following on from your comments, blahblah, this is from Canaccord's upgrade today: "....The deal is a major vote of confidence
in Invinity and its technology, and opens up an additional sales channel to add to the company's existing markets in grid service and behind-the-meter. We see this as a substantial increase in confidence in the outlook for Invinity. Canaccord
raises its rating on the London-listed company to buy from speculative buy. The price target is unchanged at 260p...." Funny that. Not a word about how massively important Bushveld and its management were in getting this deal over the line.

That's a tough one. For the immediate past at least (-1y to the present), my guess is BMN have been treated like any other minority shareholder; that is, IES management would take a call from BMN management most days, but BMN would not be 'inside' and therefore not privy to the material, non-public information regarding a transformational deal of this sort. Of course they would have been aware of Zulch and Co's desired pursuit of such a deal - since that has been publicly disclosed numerous times - but likely not the important development details. From there, certainly since Bushveld broke ranks and started selling their stake and completely disrupting the market price at the beginning of '21, it is a dead cert that Fortune and Co. would not have been any more aware of the deets of the Siemens-Gamesa deal than any of us.

careful my Lord. Them's fightin' words around here......

Seems to me, you don't seem to be

Sanchez, you're a perfect example of an empty barrel who thinks if he pumps out a few slurs and gets a few tick-ups in return, his apologist nonsense becomes factual. However, you are just as wrong as Alfa, though not nearly as clever. The dirty little secret is we can get our V from multiple sources and it is the latest fantasy from Bushveld fanatics like BBN that somehow none of this would have been possible without the soaring vision of Fortune and Bushveld. That's complete bunk. If BMN were in fact central to this deal, they would have been inside by the beginning of 2021, and would never have been able to engage in their appalling stake sell-down in the first place. They were not. Bushveld's presence here could well have added value after the RTO but unfortunately, Fortune's ambitions could not be supported by his balance sheet and BMN if anything, ended up endangering, rather than enabling, this transformational deal. Now, I will offer you the same deal as I did Alfa: stop trying to use this board as yet another forum to evangelise Fortune and BMN and I will stop spanking you and in the process revealing the truth about your precious Bushveld. This board is for Invinty shareholders and BMN is yesterday's news.

Ha! The million quid question, Roob. The unfortunate reality right now is that the broader sector is going through something of a (negative) reckoning which started in the US. A reporting scandal at Plug Power followed by terrible results at Ballard has caused a huge selloff in those major US electric battery bellwethers, which has then hit the rest of the broader sector like the relatively recent zinc battery IPO darling, EOS Energy. This selling didn't help sentiment of course, but the UK names like Ceres are cheaper than their US cousins and so didn't really get hit until this wild debate emerged over the valuation of certain assets at ITM between MS (which massively downgraded the shares) and (I think) Canaccord who confirmed their price target. This caused ITM to crash last week and brought the UK names down with it. The irony of course is that IF US instos have any appetite left for the sector, they should now be even MORE interested in IES as it was always the cheapest name in the broader sector, and today's announcement secures its future and underlines that it is one of the few listed companies with no hair on it! I am confident that Canaccord will be pitching a story very close to that one in the days and weeks to come, so we shall very much see what happens.