Member Info for DonkeyOatey

Why don't we hear the usual great snippets from the resident sewer rat himself? Where's he gone? Surely in the good old days he'd be here talking down the BOD (which was exactly what he called people all manner of insulting names for doing, before he started doing it himself!!!)

You were spot on the money, Peggy! Another day selling for less than it closed the previous day, I guess everyone except the shareholders is getting rich from ARCM. I wish they'd kick their ramping up into higher gear, I'd really like to get my shares flipped here before the clueless management find another way to dilute shareholders at multiyear lows.

H50 What does this have to do with the BOD? There's a problem all over the London markets at the moment with especially the smaller listed companies which have had problems with the auditors getting work completed in time. That's hardly the BOD's fault, unless you would prefer they pay three or four times the amount for the same work to be completed by PWC or Deloitte or KPMG, and all for what: to ensure that the shares, trading at all time lows, are still trading 500 quid's worth of shares per day? Personally, I want to see the BOD maximizing cash by getting the best price for regulatory admin, such as auditing (which is really of little benefit to shareholders in such a small company, as there's very little for them to report on which would be material to us as shareholders.) And I honestly believe that in a better run market than London, and company would have its shares suspended automatically after announcing a possible disposal of assets which could equal or exceed the current market cap in value. It makes for an orderly market if this can remain suspended until the asset sale or not is announced.

Mangio, 2p has been visible for years here - firmly in the rear view mirror!

That this hasn't moved up back to the previous highs, given we're drilling now, and drilling in an area with a proven resource - as they say, the best place to make a discovery is next to another discovery.

I've just spent the best part of a three hour flight reading the latest report, I'm not impressed. I see Benitz is now paying himself almost double what he was last year whilst shareholders have witnessed the value of their holdings almost halve. Utterly tone deaf, and confirms everything I've always thought about the guy. But my biggest concern now is that the leaders of JOG are now significantly detached in their interests from shareholders - IF (and yes I don't say it's a foregone conclusion) Neo/Sqz say "No!" at FID, then it is in the interests of the directors to just string this along for as long as possible in order to draw out salaries at this high level (or higher, who knows what they will pay themselves next time). At this rate, I suspect Benitz&co will have extracted every penny and more that they've invested into the company via salaries and bonuses. It's now effectively a risk-free gamble for a big capital gain for them; shareholders not quite the same: it has to more than double for some unfortunate folks to get their money back, let alone make a profit.

Much can be said about how we reached this point, and the despicable people who inhabit the Westminster environs, but I'm afraid I take this recent info about salaries here as a large FU from the board to the shareholders. For a long time I called for an EGM to oust Benitz, I'm no longer that interested, just looking to get my remaining shares sold and move on from this. I can only imagine how people like RL feel, having millions invested here and no credible path to divesting.

Good luck all.

You can hardly blame them, they're just trying to get a pump and dump going - it doesn't matter to me, I'm pretty sure that the shares I bought will rise by about 50%, so if they achieve it for me next week or next year, I'm happy to just hold. But the fantasies about double digits, or even pounds per share as one clown indicated, well...you just have to laugh! Even for AiM it's pretty outrageous.

Small Holding, your suggestion demonstrates a remarkable lack of understanding of how mining companies operate - there is no discovery (yet) on Arc's Zambian licences (although I'm confident there likely will be at least one.) No mining company in their right mind would make a large bid for Arc's Zambia or KCB licences at this stage, since there is absolutely nothing there to value, no guarantee to any discovery, and it would make any bidding company's management look ridiculous if they had spent millions buying land which transpired to be worthless - it is a risk not worth taking for mid or large cap mining companies' management, hence why juniors almost always make the discoveries and then sell them to majors.

It is also rather misleading the way you talk about what Anglo were happy to "pay" - you would do better to focus on this being an exploration deal and that Anglo are going to "spend" 80m. Obviously, in return for spending a lot of money exploring on Arc's land they will want something in return: that is 70% ownership of whatever discovery they may or may not make. (Your approach of extrapolating this out to what Arc's share is "worth" would be much more appropriate if there was a discovered resource and Anglo were spending a large amount to bring the resource into production and giving Arc a free carry to the point of first øre - such deals are common in junior oil and gas, and under those circumstances I would agree with you about such back-of-an-envelope valuations of relative shares in a project.)

It's quite possible that Anglo might spend years and tens of millions of dollars exploring and find nothing economic (obviously they don't think so, otherwise they wouldn't have done this deal.)

Until they actually discover something, Arc is worth exactly what they have in defined resource - nothing! (In fact, with their utter liability of a bod milking a million a year in cash out of the company, I would argue that they are actually worth less than nothing, but that's simply a personal opinion about the liability which is poor management.)

The notion that NATO would take 10 days to respond to a member state demand for article 5 assistance is pure fantasy, as is the idea that Russia would invade a NATO country. I'm pretty sure that any of the Baltic countries could keep the Russians at bay long enough for Polish and UK air support to arrive within just a few hours; Putin may be a monster but he's not a fool and he's not completely insane. The Ukraine was clearly a miscalculation, and he has dug in deeper and deeper due to his lack of accurate and honest information from the sychophants with whom he has surrounded himself; he now can't withdraw without risking his domestic position. But the notion that NATO countries will be next if the Ukraine falls is utter nonsense, put about by the Ukrainians who are desperate to convince the West that they are fighting on our behalf.

For the sake of ending this bl00dy war of attrition we need to tell the Ukrainians that there is no more military or financial support coming for them, and tell Russia that we will send in NATO troops to reinforce Ukraine if a peace treaty isn't signed to end the war by the end of the summer.

The West needs Russia for natural resources, not just oil and gas, and Russia needs the West as a market for its resources (and the Ukrainians cannot afford to finance their own war nor have they the fighting aged population to sustain these losses for much longer.)

Sadly, the global superpower is led by a clown who can't even bring himself to condemn anti-Semitism on US college campuses, he certainly doesn't have the backbone to deal with Russia/Ukraine.

Hopefully that means we will see some meaningful upward movement in the share price sometime in w/c 13 May.

Don't post rubbish, Jarv55! You'd need 51% of the votes cast at an EGM in order to oust him; you'd need a much smaller percentage to force and EGM. Since your statement ("its the first time he has been totally honest") implies that he is not normally honest, how do you know you can trust him this time? Were his lips not moving?

Spot on, Peggy - Nick von Trapp and his merry munch of overpaid men need kicking to the curb pronto, the whole admin of Arc could just be put into care and maintenance whilst Anglo get on with the drilling, I hardly think anyone at Anglo will be on the phone to Schirnding asking his opinion about anything. Not unless they need someone to mismanage a local sweetshop (to borrow the words of John Meyer on Arc's poor management team, and he's one of AiM's most respected junior mining specialists.)

Quite right! I am heartened a little though to see that the wider market sees through Schirnding's jam tomorrow routine!

True enough, but I simply consider it along with my speculative AiM junior mining punts, since it's a 2m market cap. I don't really see any difference in being listed between main market and AiM (other than the fact that I have to pay an irritating stamp duty when I buy FCM, rather like Irish listed companies.)

Deary me, Lantier - mathematics clearly isn't your strong suit, is it? Goes to credibility you know! lmao

And yes, since I only put 10% of my portfolio into speculative punts on AiM, you're quite right that I would regard £20k into something as mismanaged as ARCM as a lot to risk. It's a part of portfolio planning to decide what proportion of your assets you're comfortable taking a big risk with. Since I already have about 1.1m shares in FCM, about 50k shares left in JOG, 220k shares in GMET and whatever 3.8m POW shares (in old money) converts to, I think that I've plenty already invested in this sector on AiM. But thanks for your concern.

As for the gold assets which needed to go for a joint venture, that was the rationale for disposing of them certainly (I remember a certain cretin who brought those assets into the company and was singing their praises for years, and taking his salary the whole time surprise surprise, and suddenly they can apparently be thrown away in exchange for completely worthless shares in a fraudulent entity! You imply that the choice was a binary one between keeping the assets and no JV, or chosing to acccept worthless shares in return for them; competent management would've negotiated for actual value in cash or shares.)

I repeat the words of one of AiM's most well-respected junior mining analysts, John Meyer, about the management of this company: "I wouldn't trust the Arc board to run a local sweet shop!"

The fact that Arc's share price is at multiyear lows when they've a JV with Anglo tells me quite clearly that the market thinks there's something very wrong, and since there's absolutely nothing to worry about with Anglo clearly the problem is with Arc. And all Arc have is their Anglo JV, some KCB land they can't afford to drill, and a liability of a management team.

Let's hope so - the delivery of a few million in cash to the coffers will, hopefully, mean we remain one of the very few AiM junior miners with less than 100m shares in issue (great news for when FOMO arrives and the herd try buying in!)

Indeed he has.

What I absolutely love about GMET is that OF has the same attitude towards salaries for the bod as PJ had at POW - keep them well below six figures and put the money into the ground, and get their rewards from options when a massive discovery or two sends the share price into orbit. Nothing like having management fully aligned with the shareholders, rather than some of the worst boards in the AiM junior mining space where they place at multiyear lows to make sure they pay themselves about a million a year (I kid you not!)

"To act like the lowball placing has blown any chance of meaningful returns is quite obviously daft."

HarChris, my point was more about the poor management managing to find a way to screw things up, even with a big discovery by AA, not just that the warrants were highly dilutive at multiyear lows. As I have always said here, the extremely poor management are the real threat to this company.

Really, PP? I didn't realize that highly respected AIM junior mining analyst, John Meyer, had slated the incompetence of any other mining companies as directly and openly as he has Arc: "I wouldn't trust the Arc board to run a local sweet shop!"

Sadly, his assessment of their lack of ability is reflected in what has been happening in ARCM recently:

-failed due diligence on the Tingo shares, which are now suspended as a suspected fraud

-loss of almost $5m worth of available for sale securities from Arc's balance sheet

-massive overpayment on salaries (how these clowns can think their failed performance warrants about a million a year!)

-driving the share price down for a year and then placing an addition c20% of shares in free float at 5 year lows

The real risk in a company like ARCM comes from the incredibly poor management here - I'm not sure if anyone has ever doubted that a major will be able to find copper on our licences if there is any to be found, but with such poor leadership here which has led this company to the verge of bankrupcy and then done a placing at 5 year lows....well, it's hard to see how PIs will get any huge upside now. Sadly, NvS and his bunch of freeloading pals will still bleed a million a year out of Arc, which is a real shame. (I find the guy's behaviour at ARCM to have been an absolute disgrace - losing the only large cash/cash equivalent holding with no explanation, placing at multiyear lows rather than placing straight after the AAL deal was announced, etc. As noted junior mining AIM analyst John Meyer said, "I wouldn't trust the Arc board to run a local sweet shop!" Thing he's right on the money there.) Regardless, I've bought a couple of shares here to flip if and when this gets into the 2s (so, come on guys, get ramping please!) If it had a credible management team with integrity I'd have sunk this year's complete ISA allowance into Arc, but there's no way I'd want to risk a lot with someone like NvS at the helm.)