Member Info for BradSmith

Pretty impressive DGR , holding a baby, bottle of milk, a computer and being able to type at all :O)
Been there, no computers in those days but it was easier to feed the babies than wake the Mrs., by which time I'd be fully awake anyway.
Happy days, the kids did not answer back at that stage.
I got somethng right here, I deposited my anticipated refund, rounded to the next £50, and bought SXX sub 16p a while back. Today TLOU are looking too low, so put my refund into them instead. Hopefully a win win one day?

https://africanminingmarket.com/kalahari-energy-botswana-awarded-preferred-bidder-status-for-the-construction-of-a-97mw-coal-bed-methane-cbm-fuelled-ipp-owned-power-station/3998/

"Kalahari Energy Botswana awarded preferred bidder status for the construction of a 97MW Coal Bed Methane (CBM) fuelled IPP-owned power station.

Kalahari Energy Botswana, through its wholly-owned subsidiary Sekaname (Pty) Ltd, has been notified by the Ministry of Mineral Resources, Green Technology and Energy Security that it has been awarded Preferred Bidder status for the construction of a CBM-fuelled, IPP-owned power plant in Botswana. This notification follows from the Group’s submission in October 2018 to tender “for the development of a maximum of 100 MW coal-bed methane fuelled pilot power plant in Botswana as an Independent Power Producer”.

Sekaname submitted a bid for 97MW and its rival in the closed tender process – Tlou Energy – submitted a bid for 2MW scalable to 10MW over time. Tlou Energy has also been awarded Preferred Bidder status."

In isolation the article looks so positive, but both Tlou and Sekaname have been preferred bidders, and the only bidders , from the start. Either could have been rejected during the election process but neither was, understandably, why would Botswana want all their eggs in one basket?

Preferred bidder is as meaningful as a Mormon wife talking about HER husband when there is are multiple wives.

It is likely the article tells the truth, the BG almost surely believe Tlou will be producing electricity for them as planne, Sekaname is more dubious - I think they consisted of a handful of employees not so long ago and have a long way to go. Dunno how many they have now and I don't really care.

Kapersky , write to them and ask why?
The excess shares sound like they are registered as an AIM share , maybe we were not on the FTSE at the last OO?

Barclays are still in the dark ages!
This article from 2013 says AIM shares were ineligible at that time. They are now! I sound like Kenneth Wolstenhome :O)

http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/news/106440/what-can-you-put-in-your-isa.aspx

Wow, the penutlimate paragraph has a link to a takeover ....
Eutelsat incurring debt and paying 9 times the value of the minnow ...
that £1.40 rumour was probably very near the mark.

Avanti have achieved so much in a really complicated market, it would be terrible if they fail?
The Mexican mob sound like Avanti under DW?

https://spacenews.com/36546satmex-acquisition-gives-eutelsats-latin-america-presence-a-jolt-of/

Cheers Hits.
I found this page after much searching. Unbelievably, it looks like orbital slots are free!
En route I found Artemis was scrapped in 2017 and was moved to the satellite graveyard.
Scrapping is either to that approved area further out in space or back to earth so they burn up on re-entry.

Only 1800 slots on the equator , and companies buy other companies to acquire their slots hence
"there are an increasingly small number of telecommunication operators in the market."

I interpret that to be in line with my belief our slots are valuable but in the form of a takeover (unfortunately or not?).
Excellent conversation is here .... the last paragraph says the process is under pressure to be reviewed ....

https://theconversation.com/theres-a-parking-crisis-in-space-and-you-should-be-worried-about-it-83479

Found this from a HITS link to wiki - sounds like a total fiasco

=================

Orbit allocation

Satellites in geostationary orbit must all occupy a single ring above the equator. The requirement to space these satellites apart to avoid harmful radio-frequency interference during operations means that there are a limited number of orbital "slots" available, and thus only a limited number of satellites can be operated in geostationary orbit. This has led to conflict between different countries wishing access to the same orbital slots (countries near the same longitude but differing latitudes) and radio frequencies. These disputes are addressed through the International Telecommunication Union's allocation mechanism. In the 1976 Bogotá Declaration, eight countries located on the Earth's equator claimed sovereignty over the geostationary orbits above their territory, but the claims gained no international recognition.

Cannot find any idea of the cost of licences - Sky subscriptions for TV keep popping though!
The best I have found was this, but other pages said there is no one authority controlling space, there are many.

=======

The average individual cannot simply approach the United Nations in a General Assembly meeting to ask permission to send a satellite into space, but the Space Treaty makes it possible for citizens of member states to approach their own governments for approval.

With many different departments in governments, it would likely be the FAA, the FCC, the CRTC, the UTC, or some other department of some other government in your home country that you would need to go to, in order to obtain certification, or to obtain a license, to send a satellite into space. There may be many licenses required.

There would be much to be considered, before such an approval might be granted, depending on laws and regulations in your home country as well, such as finding a suitable launch site, regulated and controlled air space, commercial flight paths, environmental issues arising as a direct result of the launch, public safety, crowd control, etc.

======

Dan, this is typical behaviour from either/both of the trolls!
They hate a positive post at the head of this board so they provoke a reaction to their rubbish which clutters the board and moves the positive post down in the hope that genuine researchers miss it!

So please ignore them if they post again.

======================
Your post:
The company secured another 55m of new funding.

It is supposedly bleeding cash and it has no prospects to succeed.

Even if I accept all the doom and gloom prophets, I still fail to understand their dedication unless they are being paid by a competitor to slate the company to kingdom come. Such passionate dedication has to be paid for.
===============================
And my point was that obsolete satellites will depreciate by less than the obvious. Their licences granting permission to use their position in space has a value, and seem likely to appreciate now the prime locations are taken in space.
Those above the equator are the golden positions and guess whereours are.

Incredible word phonetically ,

narci
arci
cissi
sist
but definitely not a st (saint) , whether it be SS or MTB (lack of modesty screams MTB)

If I could get 5% in a cash isa , I'd be very happy?
No risky property ISA's mind! Just safe ones!

Sugar! Just realised the time!

Requested my nominee refund be transferred to my ISA a few minutes ago - and it is done already.

Depreciation is a thorny issue.
#1 and #2 will be worthless one day unless councils can get rubbish lorries up to them for the scrap.
But ,a big but, the licence for their position is going to be worth a lot in a sky that is almost fulls of satellites at the choice spots!
#5 might be big enough to replace #1,#2 and #4 traffic at that time, and #6 might be even bigger as technology advances.

Cannot remember if we were given a short lease on the space allocated by the satellite we were gifted?
But 4 choice sites is more than enough if I am right (pure guesswork but it seems plausible to me imho).

Jarvis have refunded too , looks like SM have synchronised their brokers OK!

Well the object was see if I paid the same as my broker thinks I did.
I have seen anomalies when buying and selling the same number of shares in a day.
Wondered what the scale of error was!
Well, my numbers correleate on the number of shares for all of ISA,NOMINEE, and the COMBINED totals, so it seems clear , so far , that the associated values have to in step and on my whole portfolio I actuall spent over £19k less than their figures!

If you fund you account with £100 and turn that into £250 and spend £250 on a stock - they will show you paid £250 of course. So if the share collapses and you lose it all , there is the rub , have you lost £250 or have you lost £100?

And that is what my spreadsheet was designed to highlight - the difference i.e £150

Why is it significant? Well my portfolio is worth todays price and I want to know how much it cost me in bankings.
I guess it means I have made over 19k in profit over the life of the account. BUT it does not mean I am in pocket to that tune if the value of the portfolio is down on their figures (it is). I need to do the same now on TDW and II because this is not peculiar to X-O!

You're a star Scot!
My spreadsheet has been working on Company titles
e.g.
US OIL & GAS PLC ORD EUR0.0001 (BASIC ENTS)
US OIL & GAS PLC ORD EUR0.0001 (EXCESS)
U.S. OIL & GAS PLC ORD EUR0.0001
which caused problems identifying them as the same (for all my invested companies) !

When I checked the Excess entries they are all the B* format epics and can be ignored!
I changed to the Epics instead so the name does not matter - one minor problem History shows as GXG.W and my portfolio shows them as GXG.L so I compare up to the "." - easy peasy!
Took 20 seconds to transwer columns from name to epic and my code worked perfectly including the entry for
GBP.C@SHGBP my cash balance! Cheers mate!

I guess you all saw it on the news - the best I have I ever seen - but on The Wright Stuff, now Jeremy Vine they showed the second one.

6 runs or a girl's future - the yanks win that bit, but motives aside is there anything between them?

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ben+stokes+catch&t=ffab&atb=v166-1&ia=videos&iax=videos&iai=h7GqCq61Y_E&pn=1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKMllY6jHp0

Was Ben's a fluke - here is an easy one which suggests it was not.
How cool was the yank though?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_3q7DZRgE0

I guess you all saw it on the news - the best I have I ever seen - but on The Wright Stuff, now Jeremy Vine they showed the second one.

6 runs or a girl's future - the yanks win that bit, but motives aside is there anything between them?

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ben+stokes+catch&t=ffab&atb=v166-1&ia=videos&iax=videos&iai=h7GqCq61Y_E&pn=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKMllY6jHp0

Was Ben's a fluke - here is an easy one which suggests it was not.
How cool was the yank though?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_3q7DZRgE0