Member Info for ChirpyCheep

The RNS states RM now owns 133m shares. Seems to exclude the White Flame acquisition, anybody know why ?

TA. your posts would have more credence if you actually read some of the RNS's.

Both TW and ES also added yesterday.

LWHL

You are right, to a certain extent.

I can take your bear views as they are not accompanied by vitriol.

But as TA says the bulls look at the upside.

It's hard to get one's head around things.

I was looking at Talon Nickel in the US, and that's not the easiest place to build a mine.

Talon is a good comparison as it is Ni, Cu, Co

And that's valued at C$85M plus , and not only is it not even in production it hasn't even received environmental permits, although agreed it does have some serious backers.

I though that looks an expensive MC cf 80M

I looked again and realised that C£85M is for only half of the project!!!!!

That's why we are invested.

We all want it but you can see why a separate listing is not on for Disko

https://archive.ph/9V2Bf

Just not the right time, as I intimated a few days earlier.

TA, that would beat the 27 years it takes to build a mine in Zambia on average.

That's the longest of any major mining jurisdiction in the world, and it hasn't put Kobold off.

LWHL, as I keep saying I know nothing about mining. It's simple maths though on this. If Disko was to mine tomorrow how much would it be worth £100m. conservatively ? Well 10% Free Carry trebles the MC. As you allude to one has to look at the context; if 80M was worth £250M it could do what it wants with Disko.

ES has stated to me that they are not planning to spin out Disko.

Some like LWHL may take his comments with a pinch of salt, which I can understand.

Don't know quite why but they feel the time has passed and needed to be done when the company was larger.

I guess they don't have the resources to get a listing off the ground; not many junior explorers have come to market recently.

Just simpler, quicker, cheaper to get a JV ?

I seem to be in a minority of one but I don't think 80M should put any more money in to Disko and should become in effect a sleeping partner.

LWHL- I agree in principle that information from BOD's is not worth the paper it's written on.

I did actually say that I don't try to extract information from the BOD; who in their right minds would expect market sensitive information from BOD's.

I converse occassionally to get a FEEL for what's happening and to help make judgements on their nouse, ability etc.

As regards asset sales again I agree with you; however their might be an element that they can access capital by other sources and their is definitely an element that given the paltry MC they are being held to ransom and the difficult route is to hold their nerve. As I said their timescale is different to ours. Didn't you say on another board that the average punter on here has an investment timescale in weeks ? It would be nice to know where you got that information from.

If they can get one ship afloat having all these assets becomes less of an issue.

Ashton

I took your advice and contacted ES.

I occassionally converse with ES, not so much to extract information as I wouldn't expect him to provide anything meaningful, but to help him get a feel for the market view from a retail investor.

His reply was typically courteous and eloquent.

I asked him a few one liners, one of which, was on the subject of downstream activities.

His reply was concise and didn't give much away but I can make the following observations:

He doubled down on the RNS and that they are looking at downstream activities

He's sees the downstream market as a point of diiferentation; it's not just about exploration. I mentioned the phrase vertically integrated and i still it is relevant here.

Downstream will be pertinent if exploration is successful; he obviously has a different timescale to the average retail investor

Not a lot of information but I wouldn't expect otherwise.

As an aside this is why I am pretty sure Rach does not have a substantial holding, and I guess but don't know that the holding is nil, as she would be conversing with the MD of a company who is pretty engaging. I do and Ashton does and she doesn't yet she is the second most prolific poster here.

Ashton

Another way of looking at it.

Taken at face value it invites ridicule because it implies 80M will be looking at a"vertically integrated " operation.

Actually what they might be saying is that we need to INTEGRATE upstream and downstream activities.

ie a JV with somebody who can provide downstream expertise.

Ashton

Taken literally it's a ridiculous statement, and Rach was very quick on the draw poking fun, primarly at yourself.

If you drill down it does make some sense though; ES is just stating that 80M need a clear understanding of what the end " consumers" will look like and position their "upstream " activities accordingly. 80M have to make a judgement on what products consumers will be buying eg how viable is White Hydrogen going to be

I don't think 80M will look to " refine" products derived from their exploration activities etc !. That's ridiculous.

Chill, the Ebay reference was jest. Moreover, it may well be that an outright sale of any of the assets may not actually happen. Different ways of skinning a cat.

............ in the news.

The relevance ? This company has had virtually a sole mandate- to be sold.

It's in a hot sector and more advanced than any of 80M projects- and has had little interest, certainly from majors, MTL is hardly a congomerate.

Rach seems to think you can put these projects on ebay; they can take some selling.

Ashton, AA, seem to be exiting Nickel and Platinum ?

https://www.miningweekly.com/article/anglo-american-sells-australian-coal-mines-for-38bn-as-part-of-portfolio-reshaping-2024-11-25.

I wonder if this will affect RM's thinking ? Does he prefer energy to metal ?

or AA's towards Disko, although Disko is also copper which is one metal they are concentrating on.

Ashton, would you not need to complete the EM surveys before nailing down the drilling; and would it not be prudent for these results to be confirmed before a revised JV is also nailed down ?

Ashton, thank you for your posts.Keep them coming.

There are 7 priority targets but do you have any idea of the minimum drilling that would be required- and possible costs ?

After all, RM has said one doesn't much for " proof of concept" Could they narrow the targets down further to save costs ?

And if a bare minimum campaign could be undertaken what's the chance of 80M going it alone, again after all if Disko has much potential as you believe ownership becomes less important. It's also a more pertinent question after Dec 31 because 80M will have greater access to capital with full ownership rather than part ?

Or do you think they could go down the route of " Free Carry " and concentrate on gases.

I think we all, even Rach, agree something has to change.

To use a well worn adage we are where we are and RM has now nearly 16% of the company. I'd guess most AIM companies don't have a Director with such a holding. Moreover, many people would say that is serious " skin in the game" and I can't quite see how a " shady purchase/ venture" would be in the interests of the largest shareholder. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

I can understand though why you seek further clarity.

Ashton, you did use the word " noteworthy" . Do you mind saying why you used this word.

Rach, you are a prolific poster on here, wpuldn't it make more sense to spent some of that time and effort liasing with Management rather that posters on here ?

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Wce-i-V9II

32m

Ashton, I was simply trying to ascertain whether your views on drilling Disko were predicated on fact or were an opinion. I think therefore it was a fair question. We are both 80M bulls but where we differ is you are Disko, Disko, Disko and I'm not even sure it's the best asset., although agreed your knowledge is far superior to mine.. Their credibility will be shot if Disko is not drilled next year but only as it stands at the moment. They only have so much time and money and Disko could quite easily be delayed if their was substantial interest in their Oil and Gas assets. So I understand Disko, Disko, Disko but they also have other assets that could transform the share price, regardless of Disko.