Member Info for fatsuperman

A higher dividend will attract different investors and increase the market cap, but the management rightly care a lot less about that as a priority when compared to growth opportunities and structural improvements to the business - which will ultimately mean more in the long run. Very pleased they are focusing on this, particularly given the rather unique situation at the moment - with a lot of large competitors having disappeared from the scene.

Keep on pushing and trying to hoover up that business please!

Exactly right Carrington. Look at how MKS has benefited as competition has failed over the last 5 years. Debenhams, Arcadia, EWM/Jaegar, Victoria Secret UK, GAP Europe, Cath Kidson, Laura Ashley, Oak Furnitureland, Made.com. Ted Baker on the precipice, Body Shop in a terrible shape, etc. Obviously Next have picked up a bunch of that business as well, but the facts are that M&S are acquirers in this market, not at risk of failure / acquisition themselves.

I agree Costa. Highly likely that management won't be upset if a number of people walk out the door, a cheap way of dropping the headcount in head office. The issue I have with this is that it's often the best people that leave first - the dross never go as they hang on as long as possible. Still, let's hope the effect is minor enough that it doesn't impact the company performance.

You could argue that post COVID the company have let their employees choose where they work, and during this time we have enjoyed our most successful period in decades. If I were the CEO I’d probably not change anything like this without strong proof it makes a positive difference.

The OP is surely an M&S employee, given no posting history anywhere. Let’s hope we don’t lose key people - and I don’t mean upper management, who are likely already in the office a lot, or at least paid well enough that they won’t mind. But the people in the middle actually making the business hum.

I do t have a lot of experience in this type of culture change, but have done some reading and I wouldn’t say it’s positive news. Also wouldn’t expect it to impact company performance over the short and medium term. Long term who knows!

Hi Dickbat, yes - I remember the ARB CEO selling a load of stock when the share was multiple pounds during the pandemic bitcoin rally, didn't go down well with shareholders. Especially now they are under 10p. Horrendous.

I know very little about PANR, but if I were invested and they needed money, I think I would welcome a decent share issue whilst they are at historic highs. Because as you say, the alternative choices to get development funding are always awful.

Winter in Alaska is even worse than Wyoming, so best of luck to PANR.

Dickbat, the benefit that brings though, is he could do a lovely little share issue, get a bunch of operating capital, and barely dent the share price. So I'd love a CEO like that if I were trying to develop a company. Over here, we'd dilute 50% just to get the money for another year. Thank god we are tantalisingly close to some real changes in our fortune.

It's easy for people to point and debt and operating problems, when comparing to a company that has done nothing. If PANR ever get there (most don't, even when presented with fewer mountains to climb than they have), then just wait and see how their operation fares in the face of reality.

He is correct though Stas. These people who aren't invested in the company are not providing their opinion out of the goodness of their hearts, they are trying to influence people to sell, so their shorts can be profitable. They are fairly transparent about it.

Genuinely puzzled why people believe all these share bashers spend their time commenting on a company they have no involvement in. I appreciate there are absolute nonsense rampers as well (often part of the same crew!!). But the majority of people invested are just regular folk who want the company to do well, for the benefit of everyone.

The investors and company (and customers) win if the company does well, but the shorters lose.

If the company fails, everybody loses except the shorters.

It's very frustrating being on a board that is infested by people trying to make noise, to drown out debate. You only have to read people's posts to see their motivation.

Yes. And if you go to the NETW page, and look at the RNS from yesterday at 11:42, you will see that it is identical to the one here on COPL.

No BigBear.

It is nothing to do with COPL. It is related to a company called Network International Holdings (NETW), who are being bought out by another company. As part of the takeover, any investor of NETW with 1% or greater interest must notify the company, who will issue an RNS for each.

The one we are seeing is BNP Parabas saying they have a position in NETW. Absolutely nothing to do with COPL, and just a mis-filing.

But the bad part is that it's made us drop ~5% because of someone else's mistake

An apology, plus a matching number of NETW shares for each COPL share we hold... to say sorry?

It's definitely a mistake. So somebody unrelated to COPL, accidentally publishes and RNS on our page, showing their position in an entirely separate company (NETW) that is being taken over. That causes people invested in COPL to wet the bed a bit and sell, and we drop a few percent.

It's utterly ridiculous.

Network International being taken over, loads of RNS' on their page today.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/NETW/

Under Rule 8.3(a) of the Code, any person who is interested in 1% or more of any class of

relevant securities of an offeree company or of any securities exchange offeror (being any

offeror other than an offeror in respect of which it has been announced that its offer is, or is

likely to be, solely in cash) must make an Opening Position Disclosure following the

commencement of the offer period and, if later, following the announcement in which any

securities exchange offeror is first identified.

Why do they have to notify at such a low level?

This message from Prophetus was written by ChatGPT. This is exactly how it responds to questions. The only thing he removed was ‘As an AI chat it’

So thanks for ‘your’ wisdom there Prophetus.

Nope not signing, surely that will take a while longer. Currently Art is busy sorting out the existing wells. Should be a nice production boost coming our way as wells come back online. All good progress to support us as we do this deal.

ITS? Is he really suggesting ITS as a good place to have put your money? A company whose future exists only as a potential shell to reverse into? No value for the actual company itself. A few people got lucky riding a market cap of practically zero to less than £1m. And there is no guarantee that anyone will take it up, so it's a fast buck for the vultures, which will likely leave a load of other people holding the bag later.

Shaa - hardly Warren Buffet 2.0 is it

The problem in moving the main support centre to Leeds is that you won't convince many of the current team to move. A small percentage would, but not many. Which means you have to entirely replace a load of your talent. Of course there are plenty of great people in the North of the country, but it's likely to have quite a disruptive impact on the company in the short term.

Fastfood provides a good reminder why this forum is absolutely useless to serious people.

A load of utter made up nonsense about 'tight rock' and '2000 bopd' drills, with a bit of 'nature reserve' thrown in. The only possible explanation for making things up is that you have something to gain from people being worried. I'm all for a reasonable debate about the pros and cons of a share - and all junior resource plays are inherently risky - but the sort of post from fastfood is just ridiculous.

That's me logging off for another year.