Member Info for chattty

Add in the potential Of Gmet's recent RNS and it is feasible that could be part of any transfer deal in association with POW as Gmet will not be developing those assets .

Whilst POW hold 63% of Gmet they do not control Gmets actions so a win win allround.

I do not subscribe to your concerns.

I'll highlight a crucial distinction: GMet has only been listed for a mere nine months, and in this short time frame, the value growth trajectory has been nothing short of astonishing.

Unlike PJ and POW, where Mr. Bell spearheaded operations with limited funding, the situation is vastly different.

Firstly, the financial outlook is robust, with minimal concerns regarding finances. They have meticulously planned their operations, and their financial position remains solid, providing a sturdy foundation for growth.

Additionally, unlike the initial challenges faced by PJ and POW, all major infrastructure for GMet/PM is either already in place or readily available. This ensures smooth operations and minimizes potential bottlenecks in the development journey.

In essence, the stark differences in their circumstances compared to PJ and POW should assuage any concerns regarding their trajectory. With a firm financial footing, meticulous planning, and readily available infrastructure, GMet is poised for continued success and sustained growth in the foreseeable future.

As I see it, OF's priority =Pilot Mountain remains steadfast and unwavering. The development and operation of Pilot Mountain is at the forefront of the agenda and will continue to hold the top spot.

The recent developments indicate promising prospects, particularly with the anticipated support from the US government in funding the construction and operational phases of the mine over the next three years. This significant backing alleviates a considerable cost burden and paves the way for smoother progress.

While it's true that Gmet frequently announce new discoveries, these shouldn't be misconstrued as diverting attention from Pilot Mountain. On the contrary, these exploration updates serve to enhance the overall value proposition without significantly detracting from focus on Pilot Mountain. They contribute to bolstering the asset base at minimal cost, thereby reinforcing our position in the market.

In essence, the commitment to Pilot Mountain remains resolute, and these exploration announcements only serve to fortify Gmet,s standing and add depth to its portfolio.

It looks like a fund raise will be after any half decent news as the losses are mounting. It will be surprising if such a raise is issued above the current s 0.60

The sp leaves little room for potential profits so traders who are the backbone support of sp movement will only watch until they see opportunity for profit.

The RNS crashed the sp, despite costs being reduced and management say pipeline opportunities are expected to be converted into signed deals .

Management state meeting their own forecast market expectations for the full year is unlikely due to high cash burn and revenues down 70% .

The PI Flat Earth Theorists who ignored the companies previous history could have bought twice as much stock had they taken note of the warnings seen in the accounts .

Yes 'SII' is short form for 'Shares in issue'.

Mr Bell's post threatening financial retribution against PIs who voice their opposition to his companies lifestyle is astonishing to say the least.

Anyone who has anything factual of interest concerning Bell and his past actions please publish it here so all can see just remember to keep it legal.

In light of the lack of substantial orders, it is entirely possible that the BOD is now working towards a funding raise. Any fundraise involving service shares will likely be pre-sold into the market, potentially leading to a significant decline in the sp but benefiting those involved. Unfortunately, in such scenarios,PI's generally lose out. This is a common concern when fundraising activities have a dilutive effect on existing shareholders, impacting the share price negatively.

So repeating my post made about a week ago.

The company's recent announcement in mid-December about a £553k contract appears to be the most significant development in terms of contracts. Although there might be news about smaller contracts in the tens of thousands, the lack of updates on substantial contracts raises concerns.

The £553k contract is set to finish in April, and the company's financial rearrangement indicates a monthly burn rate,p.a. of £300,000 from the £3.5 million CIH announced in early November.

The company completed the reset of its fixed cost base to £3.5 million per annum by September 2023, aiming to reach break even within two years from August/September 23. This plan allows for an average cash burn of £1.75 million per annum over two years.

The BOD expects to secure additional business contracts totaling around £3.5 million by August/September '24. Falling short of this target could result in a significant shortfall in available funds, when set against cash burn,increasing the likelihood of another fundraise in the near future.

Given the company's dismal fiscal track record and perceived arrogance towards private shareholders, indicates that any future fundraising efforts may come at a serious discount,circa 30% to the existing sp.,

Best to consider these factors and assess the company's ability to secure additional contracts within the specified timeframe before risking an investment.

True a number of IPO warrants expire on the 10th MAY.

O.F. is keen to keep the SII as low as possible so any raise will be minimized

Any additional information about the following would be appreciated?

Any penalties involved for late payment or is it just a straight deal?

Katoro Gold PLC (AIM: KAT), the strategic and precious minerals exploration and development company, announces that in terms of the Joint Venture Agreement ('Agreement') with Lake Victoria Gold to develop the Imweru Gold Project as announced on 7 March 2022, (RNS Nr 8292D dated 7 March 2022) LVG has to date not provided any proof of payment of the agreed Capital Contribution, payable on or before 31 December 2023 , commensurate with the Agreement referred to above.

I have no objection to being corrected.

Thank you for your permission to carry on.

Perhaps you could confirm the following -Mr A. Bell was asked to resign from POW because of the amount of PushBack the the BOD including PJ were experiencing ?

Then-

Remind us how many times RRR has raised funds?

Remind us which of RRR's risk projects has ever produced a return to shareholders.

Remind us of the amount of depreciation in value the sp has suffered over the last say 15 years.

Thank you.

Noted your comment;- Others on here spotted that some photos of trucks put up by RRR,that were purporting to move Lithium under a sales agreement for RRR.

Apparently those trucks had nothing to do with and were not working for RRR.

Shortly after RRR had been found to be economic with the truth the photos were removed.

Apart from the false photos .

The price of lithium =The average annual price for battery-grade lithium carbonate fell to $41,166 per metric ton in 2023, down nearly 40% from $68,075 in 2022, according to data from Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. Prices had dropped on a quarter-to-quarter basis, down about 38% in the fourth quarter.

The above news is 4 days old.

The company's recent announcement in mid-December about a £553k contract appears to be the most significant development in terms of contracts. Although there might be news about smaller contracts in the tens of thousands, the lack of updates on substantial contracts raises concerns.

The £553k contract is set to finish in April, and the company's financial rearrangement indicates a monthly burn rate,p.a. of £300,000 from the £3.5 million CIH announced in early November.

The company completed the reset of its fixed cost base to £3.5 million per annum by September 2023, aiming to reach break even within two years from August/September 23. This plan allows for an average cash burn of £1.75 million per annum over two years.

The BOD expects to secure additional business contracts totaling around £3.5 million by August/September '24. Falling short of this target could result in a significant shortfall in available funds, when set against cash burn,increasing the likelihood of another fundraise in the near future.

Given the company's dismal fiscal track record and perceived arrogance towards private shareholders, indicates that any future fundraising efforts may come at a serious discount,circa 30% to the existing sp.,

Best to consider these factors and assess the company's ability to secure additional contracts within the specified timeframe before risking an investment.

Directors hold around 10% of the company alongside an additional 20% of the company held by a half dozen or so 3%+ investors.

Reasonable holdings by any yardstick.

EOE

The company's heavy reliance on continuous and numerous placings, where shares are sold forward by placees, is causing significant profits for some but potentially reducing the stock price for private investors. This practice appears to divert attention from the company's commercial prospects and overall merit. Frequent share issuances negatively impact market perception, as investors interpret them as a lack of confidence in the company's ability to generate revenue. The consequences, such as dilution of existing shareholders and a declining share price, are disheartening for private investors. Holding the stock has become costly, and there is a clear need for the stock price to reflect the company's business merit.

The general recommendation is for companies to prioritize building commercial value and merit over relying excessively on financial maneuvers. Transparent communication about fundraising strategies and capital use is crucial for building trust with investors. Unfortunately, the observed lack of strategic planning and clear communication suggests ongoing challenges for the company. Given concerns about the investment, a thorough analysis indicates that, at this time, investing in this company should be avoided.

Apart from the above the question comes to mind 'What business merit'

§

I seem to remember recently reading that XF73 was on trial by the NHS somewhere in the Midlands ?

Has anyone information on the above.

Thanks.

Yes-A yearly cash burn of £3.6 million indicates that the company is spending more money than it is now generating. This situation will be unsustainable in the long term, especially if the orders announced do not cover the ongoing monthly costs. It's an investment worry when the company's current revenue/incoming orders are not sufficient to offset its operational expenses.

The information provided in the results states there are financial challenges for the company.

The mention of a share option scheme for all staff, a common practice for companies aiming to incentivize employees and align their interests with the company's success.

Concern arises when there are "exceptionally high numbers of options" granted to those who played a role in the company's previous difficulties. So it raises questions about the fairness and appropriateness of such incentive programs.

The remarks about the past not influencing the future are ridiculous ;-Past information

highlights a common sentiment in financial analysis: the historical performance and decisions of a company often have implications for its future. It's a reminder that understanding a company's financial history and management decisions is essential for making informed predictions about its future performance.

In summary, the provided information suggests financial challenges for the company, including a significant yearly cash burn and potential concerns about the share option scheme. Investors and stakeholders may need to carefully assess the company's financial health, management decisions, and recovery strategies when making decisions related to investments or involvement with the company.

Apologies in advance for any errors.

It is a cash burning operation,if memory serves it costs the company circa £300,000 per month to stand still -that is £360,000 per year.Also as far as I am aware it does not take account of 'the asset' cost of circa £1.2 Million a year.

So unless substantial orders materialise expect further fund raising .

Nearly all options have an extension availability subject to negotiations.

It was a reasonable deal, PC gets more money now with an increased option price.

SP will no doubt drift lower to >0.05 unless there is some surprising news.