Member Info for flashgarden

Rpg - no.

Citm ....you obviously cannot read.

I have never said that.

For 21/22 he was paid 600k.

If he successfully negotiated 2 profitable deals for shareholders in that period then each deal cost shareholders 300k for AC.

If he successfully negotiated 3 then each deal cost shareholders 200k.

He is there to make a profit for the shareholders - nothing else.

Everything he does to negotiate, raise funds, release RNS, travel ......EVERYTHING ....has to be offset against what he achieved for shareholders.

On tilapia what did he achieve for shareholders over a 4 year period......so far zilch.

What else has he achieved for shareholders over that period - tunisia and a seat at the negotiating table in benin.

Fortunately for him, electricity prices in italy due to events over which he had zero input has offset his woeful performance in getting oil and gas out of the ground.

You have to remember that a 20 million payout would only cover costs to date. A 30 m payout only attributes 10m to the asset.

Also take into consideration that the npv of 104m only reflects part of the overall asset and is conservative.

On that basis I feel as though logp feel confident that they could get a lot more than 30m.

I would settle for 3p but think main holders would want 7p min.

Agreed time is a major factor. 12 months and 3p.....maybe.

Think there are a few twists and turns to go here yet tho.

In for 1% on a binary bet.

The 5.7m has not been received yet.....it appears to be as elusive as ZEN bopd.

Your figures are woeful.

At over 600K a year for AC, 30k gets you ????

The RNS say a management team went to congo for multiple visits.

try harder .

I never said congo cost more than CAD20M.

You obviously struggle with basic english.

I explained that congo was part of the overall costs for the year and I listed what some of those costs were. Do you think andrea is not getting paid for every day in congo? ...or even discussing it?

I tell you what, go to brazzaville business class and buy me a table. Get me a receipt and when you come back I will reimburse you for the table. You will have to pay everything else yourself tho. .....or even better set youself up as a company director in a furniture importing business, get some one else to pay for the table and your flights and accomodation and wages in exchange for a share in your company, negotiate a cheap price for the table and tell everyone how amazing your negotiating skills are, then lose the table but keep the money from the shareholders because you deserve it.

Keep on denying it.

the price is 0.425.

TYB wants me to mention the acquisition of AAOG which was eventually for an amount of 200k after initially being 1m then 800k.

As if that is the total cost .....ludicrous!

Conveniently ignoring all of the other costs associated with the failed attempt to operate in congo.

The fundraisings in late 19 and through 20 which state for all to read that they were in particular for congo. The employing of advisors, the setting up of zenith congo, the the sourcing of drill equipment, the loans. I could go on and on. Do you think that all of these had no costs associated with them? You accuse me of telling lies. What lies? Everything I have said is supported by RNS and company reports.

You accuse me of not supporting my statement that congo cost a lot of money . You want an exact figure. There is no exact figure available as you well know because it is conveniently hidden from view but that same lack of definition undermines IVS claim that there was little to no cost associated with congo. But you conveniently do not challenge that statement because it supports your ramping agenda.

One thing is for sure, the cost was multiples of the purchase price of AAOG. The business travel and accomodation arrangements to brazzaviille alone probably topped that.

So I do not need an exact figure to be right. Anyone with a sgred of intelligence knows that Congo cost a lot of money for something that eventually did not result in a licence and O&G production for tilapia. The monies owed to AAOG have not been received. The only folk who benefitted were those who receivement payment for their part in the whole failed attempt, of which andrea was the main beneficiary, as is clearly stated in the company accounts. So if anyone is lying its IVS as he claimed that congo was to andreas detriment.

The price is 0 425.

Rather than sitting there all smug you should all be as angry as hell. That is how anyone who has invested money here should feel.

I do understand them. You dont know me but if you did you would know I definitely understand them. I have already said that only a select few know the actual cost. But you dont need to know the figure to know it was substantial.

The same argument works both ways. ivs doesnt know the actual figure either but he has provided zero evidence to why he thinks it was next to nothing. The reason is because he knows he would be torn to shreds.

Its the usual biased bs. I dont care what you think tbh. I am right so carry on with your bs.

Ivs doesnt know, neither do you. So how come you say it cost next to nothing?

The reason is because the only cost you are considering is the initial outlay on AAOG. Thats an embarassment for you as it highlights both your naivety and blinkered attitude.

I wonder how you make it through the day.

The price is 0.425 tyb.

Thats all the knowledge I need.

If only you had waited.

Ok then tyb, prove that it 'cost next to nothing' . And before you come back with the schoolchild analysis of the initial outlay for AAOG, that is not the total amount that has been spent on congo.

The truth is, only a select few know the exact figures for the total cost for congo but a significant part of the overall company expenditure is attributable to it because it was a major part of the strategy at the time. ZEN even had an office there. You never stopped wittering on about it virtually every day for 2 years so even you thought it was major..... in between demeaning comments about other investors of course.

So I do not need to know the exact figures to know it was a lot of money. To make an assessment I only need to know financial information that has been released and what the developments actively being pursued were......I can glean that from RNS. So, whatever you say, i am not wrong in stating it was a lot of money when all costs are taken into account. There is more to support my stance than IVS stance that it was little to no money and was to andreas detriment. absolute piffle! Compared to what we ended up with it was an infinite amount of money.

The price is 0.425 btw investing guru. If only you had waited. shame.

HaHaHaHa.

Im not wrong. I can read accounts.

The price is 0.425.

The directors are sitting pretty. Investors are all on losses.

....and the car wash just keeps on cleaning up.

Anyone who thinks tilapia cost little to no money is an idiot and is beyond help.

You said little to no money

you said it was to his own detriment.

prove it.

It was posted to Ivs = invest very smart.

I didnt say all the costs were on tilapia. I said included. As tilapia was a major area of concern, the percentage would not have been inconsequential.

Can you read?

Ok then, ivs, seeing as you are the one claiming that he put little or no money into it, tell me how much of the total WASNT spent on tilapia.

'at his own detriment'....wtf

Err no I havent.

Are you saying that those costs are not part of the overall cost of tilapia?

A politicians answer would be to hide them as you are trying to do.

Buy a delivery van for 10 k. sell it for 10k 10 years later. has it cost you zero?

No. insurance, tax, servicing, storage, drivers.They are all part of the cost of owning the van.

Tilapia has cost the company time and money and currently there is nothing to show for it for shareholders. The only ones who have benefitted are those who have received payment for ultimately producing nothing.

Regardless of the reasons, there is nothing to show for it.

The whole reason for this companies existence is O&G production and development. So where is it.?

When was he put in his current role 2009/10/11??

What the shareholders would like to know is what are the production figures in BOPD at the present time, today, after 12- 15 years of dealmaking.

The onus isnt on me. You are the one making the claim that everything related to tilapia was not at the company expense.

The first congo related rns was 23 Dec 2019 which was forced due to media speculation; so its being going on from before that date

RNS dated 12th march 2020 stated.

'As announced to the market, Zenith has centred its strategic focus on pursuing large-scale, revenue generating oil production and development opportunities in Africa.'

Therefore, all financing and admin costs at that time included an element related to tilapia as it was one of (if not the main) area of focus.

Last RNS on tilapia was 17 Feb 2023 .....and its still ongoing due to legal proceedings.

Lets just consider 1 year within that period say 21/22

CAD $15.6M raised.

Admin expenses CAD$12.5M

Employee costs(including in point noire, congo) CAD$8.9M

Directors remuneration CAD $872K of which andrea got 360K wages, 200K bonus and 43K health insurance.

80 m options granted to directors of which 41 m went to andrea.

There is more obviously, I havent included cost of finance for example.

All of the above included costs /dilution associated with tilapia which was a major area of focus in that period.

That is one year......do you want me to go on.

Please now show me the figures to back up your claim that it was 'at his own detriment' and 'he put little to no money into it'.