Member Info for Feeks

It doesn't mean that I can not be fairly critical of the board for making so many bad decisions at the expense of shareholders. I have empathy for those caught up in this Omnishambles. In my view the motivations of Directors have not squared with the interests of ordinary shareholders. Hamoodi knew this. He would have rewarded shareholders with a realsitic value generating plan. They've been screwed instead.

TW - I am personally delighted to have sold at nearly 30p -

In 3 short years, the company has gone from settling a litigation law suit for $150m to recommending a delisting to save £700k pa. Its a shambles of epic proportions and only the most witless of investors would back these self- serving Directors to deliver shareholder value.

And that's hardly a good investment signal is it, TW.

(Of TW):-

"You will be singing the praises of this company as it goes into administration, or a fire sale."

Feeks, 24 March 2026 @13:00

TW, if just a tiny fraction of your output is what you genuinely believe, then you are a danger to yourself. I've never seen a worse judge of a situation. It's both naive and deluded, and I hope no one here takes your advice

"I will be very surprised if the vote fails but if it does I do not think the shares will respond positively"

You are surely having a laugh. If they delist investors will almost certainly end up with nothing.

The noisy retail investors might have a point though, don't they ...? You seem to think not. It's been obvious for ages, which way this company is headed barring some miracle. Meanwhile, you seem happy the company keeps on "executing"!

No, you don't. You just hyped it to the hills - anything neutral was to your mind always a positive. Totally blind to all the business failures. Incredibly poor judgment which no doubt had caused others to lose money

The truth is you've been played like fools.

Hang your head in shame Terry.

Not something I saw coming.... What chance it could be rejected on the strength of the shareholder vote?

Lol, you guys are blatant rampers through and through. Caveat emptor

It is not impossible to believe those behind RAM, or a bigger entity in the queue behind it, might be waiting in the wings, and who will perhaps now think it's cleaner to bid outright given all the regulatory concerns. There has to be more to the picture than we have seen, or else why risk $25m + $125m on a whim, albeit tranche 2 is purely an option.

Please can anyone tell me why the bulk sampling costs were not computed as part of the $25m investment in the first place..!?

I do ok with my stockpicking thank you with a keen sense of what to avoid. I've been investing in small caps for the past 30 years and followed this one for quite a few years. Pretty obvious the cavalry has descended all of a sudden to promote and make a quick buck.

You are seeing a pump - plain and simple!

"Should the 'notional' $1B capex cost increase then ZIOC's share of the project will be diluted downwards from 12.5%. Mr Market knows this."

Yes that could happen but probably won't. The $125m / 12.5% share has been calculated and we were told directly that $1bn is effective a cautious estimate based upon the funding likely to be available.

That's interesting because you have expressed diametrically opposed views in the past.

Spot on! And yet the pumper prefers to offload criticism to the board. Lovely narrative

Ok but negative comments on this BB do not sway the market one bit. You know this TW!