Member Info for ChirpyCheep

Ashton, sorry don't think I can make it, as I've just booked some holiday this week.

I did look at a flying day trip on the train but the fare is larger than the MC of 80M !

B/A

FWIW I think it's a good deal after a very very bad deal.

I actually dropped ES a line saying Kobold had thrown them a kipper.

I think they actually threw 80M another kipper when RM rejoined; surely RM would not have stated Disko was the priority if he thought Kobold was on board.

So they've made a pigs ear of Disko ,nobody disputes that but I actually think RM has moved the company forward. When he joinef the company the MC was £5m; if they sell Met1 when they can they will have received a lot of that from the sale of assets that have done nothing to the share price- Met 1 and Finland; obviously he has diluted shareholders to purchase JL and Greenswitch but he no doubt saw Disko coming so I can understand RM's thinking.

Ashton/Rach

Suggestion; why don't you block each other ?

It's an anonymous BB; one can't stop posts.

However, that may bring some order.

No doubt others feel the same as IvR

Was a Film Star

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4175742/

Ashton

Good post, thank you.

You must think drilling this year is certainly lesss likely, even unlikely ?

And didn't RM confirm in his recent podcast that JL was the most important project in Greenland ? Disko then is no longer the flagship project ?

Will Greenswitch generate cash shortly, if so surely it would be better waiting than dilute at these levels.?

Moreover, I can't understand the Finnish asset sale but the last RNS clearly stated that the INITIAL holding of 6,250,000 had been sold not the TOTAL ie there is a sizeable wedge to come from Met1; what that wedge will be nobody seems to knpw. In the RNS detailing the sale it actually defined the consideration shares as "available to sell "shares; you can be pretty sure they will be selling these pretty quickly

So yes a deal could be struck to drill Disko this year but it would make more sense to wait. They've known about it for donkeys years, another year won't make a difference ?

I don't share your views on Ashton but by stating that opinion on Rach you've balanced your post, so thank you..

Zinky, understandable comments about the BOD, unfair to ask if Ashton is a proxy

This point is especially pertinent because you've never questioned Rach's motives.

Yes clarity would be good; guess any queries will be directed towards the NOMADS.

IvR, thank you taking the time for your post.

Completely understand your post, it's well laid out- thank you again

Still don't understand how " minimum" and " maximum " come into it but might be an idea to park it.

Rach, serious question.There has been no communication on the choice of toilet roll 80M use. Perhaps you should ask Ashton to speak to the BOD about that.

LWHL, look it another way

They will maintain the same holding in Met1 , ish, and have £2m in the bank.

They've indirectly sold the Finnish assets for £2m cash!- although can't prove it cos don't know how many shares they will get.

LWHL ,tried contacting the company, they don't bother replying.

My point is that I can't believe they expected the Met1 share price to move the way it has, as evidence by the sale in one go, and because of that whichever way you cut the numbers they have got a price for the sale of the Finnish assets far higher than they expected; vicariously it's a good deal.

They got a higher price than they expected for the sale which meant they could sell their existing holding. I think they got lucky.

Rach

Thank you for your reply.

I don't understand the figures and neither do you.I guessed you didn't understand the figures but it's magnanimous of you to admit that.

I could say you shouldn't comment on things you don't understand but hey we all do that.

If you can shed some light on it, either via Met1 or 80M which are two sides of the same coin I'd appreciate it

My apologies, can I put my earlier question in another simpler way.

How many Met1 shares will 80M receive for the sale of the Finnish assets.

Sorry to be a pain.

Rach

Here is an extract from the RNS dated 19/03

Based on the maximum number of Fundraising Shares that could be issued, the maximum number of Consideration Shares to be issued to 80M would be 79,114,675 (approximately equal to £1.6 million at the warrant exercise price of 2 pence). The Minimum number of Consideration Shares to be issued to 80M, assuming the pre-paid warrants are exercised in full and the retail offer is fully subscribed, will be 29,114,675 shares (approximately £582,293.50 at the warrant exercise price of 2p).

Nobody has replied to my question on how the figures for the number of consideration shares.

So can I make a few points

You NEVER do not reply to anybody who puts a postive spin on 80M

You now post more than anybody on this BB

You were openly critical of the deal struck for the Finnish assets.

Therefore do you mind if i ask you specifically

It could be argued that the topic of the sale of the Finnish assets than Greenswitch because the numbers involved are bigger, because the sale is 100% and the purchase is 25%

So to continue this discussion can you please outline your understanding of the text I have added above.

Thank you in anticipation

I've had to go to BT to increase my Band Width.

Anybody else have network issues since Rach started posting ?

I was surprised to see the TR1 re 80M 's sale of shares; it was my understanding that they couldn't sell any yet.

As LWHL has pointed out , it looks like the restriction on the original Met1 shares was protected by a " gentlemans agreement " ie not legally binding.

Much more likely that the new shares are protected legally, after all it's only additional lines in a contract

So to answer your question I belive 80M still have a substantial holding in Met1.

However, if you remember I posted a note here saying I do not understand the transcation. I got no reply so I guess I'm not the only one.

I do not understand how the enlarged share capital is calculated; there was a retail offer don't forget. So what was the Met1 share capital that the 10% refers to and why not stipulate the figure.

Related to this I also do not understand where the 29114675 and 79114675 come from.

79114675 Consideration Share is currently valued at over £3m

If anybody could enlighten me please I'd appreciate it. As you all know I don't mind looking stupid!

It will be Met1's mistake.

The % will not have included all those warrants recently added.

Ashton

Were the terms for the reversion part of the original deal ?

LWHL made the point today that I am one way traffic re 80M which I can understand but I did write to ES saying K have done them a kipper; It was a shocking deal and RE made that point. I never believed that K were commited to the Disko . Didn't RE imply that K weren't happy because their budget overran ? So it's no surprise to see a parting of the ways.

The question is if K won't move Disko forward who will and won't 80M now have to give more away to move things forward because surely the value of the project has declined with this news OR because they now have more to play with they can drill and retain more of the project ? Which one is it?

LWHL

A bit rich frankly.; you put a negative spin on the sale of the Met1 assets.

I won't put lipstick on this; it's a disappointing update.

As you will note I did ask Ashton if Disko has been put on the back burner so I wasn't expecting K to move things forward.