Member Info for daramuda

There is also concern by many investors in various listed companies that there is corruption on the part of some bulletin board posters.

Ree Tech - you don't appear to post on any other LSE bb. Are you paid to regularly criticise Rainbow Rare Earth and its process?

Understandable Legal. You will find the RNS dated 27 October 2022 on ADVFN under the title "Acquisition".

So Chinasyndrome, is it your take that the Burundi asset is worth nothing to RBW; Phalaborwa is worth nothing to RBW and Rainbow's technology is worth nothing to RBW? Who are you batting for?

When might we hear from ECR about how the sampling is progressing at Lolworth, when the samples will be submitted to the relevant assay company and if already submitted when, and finally when ECR might get the results?

I would be careful in drawing assumptions. I have an interest in two holdings. Both are included in nominee accounts. An AIM listed company is under a duty to keep declarations up to date. Individual and corporate shareholders are duty bound to to declare to a company holdings of over 3% in that company and then if the 3% increases in 1% tranches and likewise if they reduce in the same way. Aim regulations were last amended in 2021.

If the minerals, including gold, are present in commercial quantities at either Lolworth, Hurricane or Blue Mountain or some or all of them and Hayworth and Jones have the necessary competence to find them, investors in ECR will do well. If they fail, then investors will suffer as will the reputations of those "experts". In the meantime we await the results of sampling assays for Lolworth and then the results of the exploration at the other sites.

Dan - you could look at it with optimistic glasses on - that they expect to succeed and give shareholders including themselves, upon exercise of the options, real value!!! Only if you feel free to do so please let me have your twitter handle.

Notrex - he is in my view a shadow director. I had originally thought that he was restricted by an existing contract from undertaking another board position for X time. If Lolworth, Hurricane and Blue Mountain are as good as he has professed and he fails to deliver, his reputation is bound to suffer whether he is a board member or a professed CEO and non board member. Should perchance he have a reason which does not accord with the best interests of the company and that reason lands up damaging the interests of its shareholders, I am of the view that he could not hide from personal responsibility. Hence my comment about shadow directors. Is it enough for me to sell? No. I am expecting him and Jones to succeed. They have generous options.

Is named under that policy.

Shareholder register. I posted yesterday that it is the responsibility of a company to hold a shareholders register. This is available to the public. A proper request should result in disclosure. I did however suggest caution.

All shareholders had the right to participate in voting the resolutions in the recent AGM. There has been a great deal of bla about the roles of various directors and their salaries. Despite that bla, I was surprised about the lack of votes cast. I take the view that one should not criticise if one is not then going to take action when one has the right to do so.

Action. Other action is to oppose a resolution at an EGM or if one has the numbers, call an EGM. Therein can lie a danger in that although one's resolution or opposition to a resolution can be carried in an open vote, the damage resulting from that "success" can be fatal to the company.

One's view of the board. I personally have reservations about Tang. I am no geologist but I know it is not easy to strike "lucky". My view is that the jury is out regarding Adam Jones. I do appreciate Andrew Haythorpe's business skills and he did train as a geologist - I have no idea how good a geologist he is. I know a senior independent former listed company ceo who speaks very highly of Trevor Davenport. Andrew Scott is imo the equivalent of a company spokesman and communications director - I cannot see what he adds by being a director. Reputation is however very important in my view. Some of you might by familiar with The Doc - Doc Holliday. Take a peek at his twitter site and his comments about a listed stock epic TMOR and read his comments about the company's board. Reputation or the lack thereof is important.

I still trust Andrew Haythorpe to deliver although I believe that there are some who for reasons best known to themselves wish to impede his course and thus the company. He should imo review his appointment with the company and become a board director. He and his fellow directors should buy stock in the company and if not take a reduction in wages and consultancy fees. This to align themselves with shareholders and to show that they are not just company representatives for the gravy.

Please excuse the typing.

There are several websites which caution investors from relying on the contents of bulletin boards. BBs are full of posts from those who have an agenda, Besides posters who are bitter that they have lost money which results in constant criticism, there are those who ramp a stock implying great news to come who sell stock upon a resulting spike in the price and there are those who consistently criticise a company in order to damage the share price for commercial reasons for third parties or say to get the share price down for a reduced entry point. Those latter might even occasionally say that they have bought stock in the target company when they have not. In short some BBs can be a cesspit.

AH - CEO. When I read the original RNS announcing Andrew Haythorpe's appointment, I was left with the clear impression that his initial appointment as ceo did not involve a board appointment but that that position would be reviewed in six months time and that a board appointment would be made within or at the end of that time. My reasoning was that he was constricted by a contract of employment with another company from taking another board appointment (during that period). The reason for not taking up a board appointment with ECR in "that" interview - that why change a position that was working well or why mend a wheel that does not need mending - was at the very least weak - I cannot criticise those who refer to the reasoning as BS.

Some have suggested that the reason for not accepting an appointment was and is to avoid liability if the sh^t hits the fan. If one holds oneself out as a director - e.g. ceo - and one is not an appointed director one can be said to be a shadow director and as such be held personally responsible as if one is an appointed director for say ordering goods and for a negligent statement upon which investors in the company have relied which has caused those investors a loss. I would be surprised if the directors of ECR do not have a directors' PFI (professional indemnity} policy in place and that AH is a named insuree covered by that policy

I agree that his reasoning as to why he has not become a board member makes no sense and is difficult to accept but what will it do for his reputation if he fails with Lolworth, Hurricane and Blue Mountain even if he is not a director when he is CEO?

Well said Tornadotony. I am not a holder of Pensana but I wish their shareholders success and not a loss.

Dan - ref shareholders register. See section 113 Companies Act 2006. If you google either that section you should discover evidence that not only must a company keep a register but it is in fact open to the public.

Another route is to google "AIM companies share register". if you trawl that site you will come across "Seed Legals" - trawl that site and you will come to " Shareholder register - what is is and how to create one" Trawl the result and you will come to Companies Act 2006.

Scott is a director. Unless, there is a good reason to refuse the supply of a copy of the register, he as a fellow director or the company secretary or the person delegated (registrar) to keep the register should imo supply a copy of the up to date register to you. It should be updated daily.

Although in practice rarely disclosed in public, I have seen a copy of a register disclosed in relation to another company on Telegram.

I would tread carefully in that I would not want to see two cornerstone shareholders upset by public disclosure. Given that they are large holders their details are bound to be known to one or more members of the board (for e.g. approaches to partake in a placing). You could perhaps speak to Andrew Scott and ask him to see if Messrs Braidwood and Hall will speak to you. I am not a premium member of this BB for otherwise I would have communicated privately.

I sensed a change in your tone yesterday notrex. I think that it will turn out to be a wise bet/investment.

Thank you for your posts Dan and Legalwolf.

I will try to stay in line Paul!!

What's suspicious notrex is that you have an average of two pence as you recently said, because I do not believe that you have any shares. No one with stock would take any opportunity to downplay the stock. Are you being paid to deramp ECR?

Molkys - those who follow trading patterns and share deals will know that your trade was a buy by looking at the buy/sell prices relevant at the time of your trade. I am afraid that it is a common occurrence on a bulletin board list of shares (simplest way to explain it) that a buy shows as a sell and sometimes a sell shows as a buy.

I have no problem with your question Legalwolf.

I am waiting to see whether Jones has real ability as an explorational geologist when he gets to Queensland and Crescent Gold was not just a fluke for Haythorpe. If the mineralisation at the tenements in Queensland is so much easier to explore than that in Victoria, I expect them to succeed.

It would be decent if the directors could align themselves by buying stock in ECR. I see no impediment preventing them from investing - out of the income they get from the company which is being supported by shareholders' own money..

By the way Legalwolf are you a lawyer or former lawyer, considering the handle under which you post?