Member Info for CrustyPete

This sp momentum has surely got to change positively soon. Where is that news?!

Just picked up another 100k at 11.40p

Agreed broomtree "DM doing PR" more closely resembles "DM selling snake-oil". Bordering on "fake it until you make it".......

I don't disagree TTS but when it comes to the share price, PLSR have done significantly better than both.... and because DM was never involved I have more shares PLSR (by value) and have been involved off and on since the beginning.

Least likely in my view is a further fundraise (via share issue) and most likely the reg approval - I think it will be a little while yet before we see either of your alternative choices.

A "deal" on the other hand could "drop" at any time; through the financial year transition may influence that to a some small extent.

I refused to invest in He1 or HEX all the time Minchin was involved and have only gone back into both since his departure. Unfortunately, for many reasons, I have a small holding in what was once NUOG and which has today been relisted on the AIM Market as "Halo Minerals Plc" and Minchin has turned up there as NED: I will be selling up as soon as trading opens.

Well my shares are already in Tax Wrappers (SIPP's and ISA's) so the beginning of the tax year is of no consequence. Let's have the news next week!!

And what guarantee is there that Selan would go on to drill the Eocene with a new JV partner? There is no upside without doing so and who, in their right mind, is going to take that risk on that after seeing the way that Selan defrauded SYN?

Cleaner, you say "Hopefully news will come in week commencing After Tuesday 7th of April". Why "hopefully" that week? What's wrong with w.b. 30th March?! ;0)

oh ****** mcnol total nonsense, i am not conflating anything; my conversation relates totally and exclusively to galactica and does not even touch on tanzania or our "multi asset strategy". there have been two raises of $8.02m in august 2024 and $6m in july 2025 to get us to the end of stage 1 of galactica, a process that was expected to be achieved with the original raise.

the $6m raise of july 2025 has got bugger all to do scaling up and taking advantage of anything! yes i accept, even stated, that some of the current raise would bring forward the new drill programme but even that is only necessary because that programme is behind where it was expected to be.

you wont baffle anyone with your diversionary bulls hit.

good night.

Anyway one and all, I have places to go and people to meet, so I wish you all a wonderful weekend.

Let me remind you of the BoD's original statement:

"The initial programme, which has been funded by the capital raise, will require the drilling of six development wells which are planned for Q4 2024. Once these are complete, it is forecast that the sale of He and CO2 from these initial wells, will generate sufficient cash to fund the drilling and tie-back the remaining nine wells as the project is close to existing helium processing facilities, associated infrastructure and downstream users."

The original $8.02 was meant to get them to the end of stage 1 and for the revenue then to fund the drilling of the subsequent 9 wells. We agree on that BUT there was then another $6m raised in July of last year. So, if the budget wasn't exceeded, what was that $6m for?

Yes this weeks raise may well have been to advance the timeline for drilling - I even said so myself - but that cannot disguise the fact that production in H1 2025 was not achieved (December 2025) and that $6m was raised in July (and did nothing to accelerate anything!) that was not foreseen in August 2024 - at least not a need that was articulated to shareholders....

So yet me ask again why did an initial budget of $8.02m that was supposed to take us to production which was then expected to fund the subsequent drilling of another 9 wells since been increased by a minimum of $6m (July 2025) and then an unstated amount from this week's raise? Either their initial budgeting was flawed or that budget has subsequently been exceeded significantly.

McNol my 15:30 post relates exclusively to Galactica and the capital raises associated directly with that.... so your references to Rukwa are total red herrings. They may or may not be true but do NOT address my questions.

At the time of the original purchase of our 50% the estimate for production from Galactica was H1 2025 (see quotes below) so, yes, it can be and indeed is behind their original schedule and therefore this could have contributed to cash overruns.

Oh and before you answer I do recognise that some of the recent raise may be to bring forward work on the new drills and obviate having to wait for the income from the first 6, so as to short circuit the process and take advantage of current pricing.

McNol, changing the subject somewhat have you got any ideas as to the answers to my 15:30 post? AS I suggested a little earlier, we can make assumptions (production is 12 months behind schedule, costs for road build etc) but why have the BoD not been up front with the explanations and what might they be?

That was timely!

So they have upped the issue by 50% but we still don't know what %age of our subscription we will be allocated. If we get all of it I guess that suggest a 50% over subscription, but I doubt that will be the case.

Djwalls, yes is the answer, though, chastened by the outcome of last one at 0.54p have gone in for significantly fewer on this occasion - £6,000.

It will be interesting to see what allocation we all get - that will indicate how well subscribed the offer was.

From August 2024 RNS:

"The full development programme for the Galactica Project will require the drilling and tie-back of 15 wells, as well as commissioning of the relevant He and CO2 processing equipment. The initial programme, which has been funded by the capital raise, will require the drilling of six development wells which are planned for Q4 2024. Once these are complete, it is forecast that the sale of He and CO2 from these initial wells, will generate sufficient cash to fund the drilling and tie-back the remaining nine wells as the project is close to existing helium processing facilities, associated infrastructure and downstream users.

The initial wells are expected to be on stream and producing in H1 2025 and an independent third-party competent person's report indicates that an average of approximately US$2 million per annum will accrue to the Company over a period of five years. However, these estimates represent only sales from the production of helium, and the Company believes that the sale of associated CO2 into the local market, could increase this by up to 50%."

So based on the numbers above and initial $8.02m investment for a return of $15m over 5 years. Since when despite reducing capital spend by leasing the plant and equipment we have raised another £4.5m or circa $6m in July 2025 for the development of the plant (then leased) and, only this week another, unstated sum from the total £4.5m, $6m to "bring forward" (my words, not theirs) the drilling programme.

So now, all of a sudden that forecast $15m revenue stream over 5 years will have cost us an amazing $14 - 20m..... that is some ROCE, NOT!

Why?!

Agreed Jpaton and, as was commented by several people yesterday with the current He supply issues, now was an opportune time to do so. Furthermore and contrary to Toffers selective memory of events the BoD have NEVER at any point stated that they would not raise funds through the issue of further equity dilution, they simply said that they would minimise any such raises. Now is a good time to do so.

I am still somewhat perturbed though at the lack of clarity around the seeming continued necessity for further operational capital for Galactica. The very first, initial raise for the purchase of our 50% suggested that after drilling the first 6 wells, subsequent drilling and development would be self funding. And that ignores the fact that since then we have chosen to lease plant and equipment rather than fund it from capital, which should have reduced the capital requirement. Since when, we have had to find at least another £5m to do just that - and with zero explanation of the cause of the cash overrun. It is easy to make assumptions but some openness from the BoD on this would be greatly appreciated and until then does beg a series of questions.