Member Info for Foxhill

Depends on margin though. And we haven’t a clue.

Buy on close.

Not. ;-(

Might open a Purdeys if something significant transpired.

Perhaps something has triggered/changed? WTFDIK.

WHOOSH. 3%. Change Tosh’s knickers!!

How these half-truths work.

In the coming weeks. Doesn’t anyone read RNS’s.

News is inbound.

Of buys yesterday. SP didn’t move. Don’t have L2 - but the SP still looks like it’s being managed as it has done for weeks. Hmm.

30 days ;-)

Chill. It’s a measure of the distrust held!! Understandable.

You’re right - no point in you posting - if you feel that way.

Receiving 2m might be RNS worthy. The SP could do with a fillip. Revelationary if something happened on schedule.

Might confer some credibility?

It’s nothing to do with reading :-)

It’s an automatic “add at least another quarter on to anything they say” default for new investors. LTH’s disregard the whole statement. Why are you so adamant that they have the money in Q3. Nothing else they’ve said materialised on time?

And this at a time when even glaciers move at record speeds.

Every AGM I can remember has been the same.

Followed by f’all.

TC struggling to answer;

Is the Sierra Queen still for sale?

If so, is that via a vessel broker?

Farce.

Or, “just auction the f’in flagship”

Have a good weekend all. Sorry for being such a miserable pessimist. Don’t not where I get it from.... :-)

And just for the record - and clarity;

“We have Foxy ably representing the Bear camp who believes that past failures are an accurate guide to the future and that the stated contracts (plural) will never be signed.”

Doesn’t represent what I think or why I post. I’m flattered by ‘ably’ though.

I don’t think past failures are an ‘accurate guide’ to anything - but they should be remembered and taken into account.

Investors seem all to happy to look at an RNS - take it as the new gospel - until it doesn’t happen - then cling to the next one, which conveniently forgets what was said last and sets out a new narrative. Somebody here, he knows who he/she/gender/bloody gender fluids, gave them until October - trouble is that was 2016!

I’m willing to moan about that not happening despite what we were fed - others find it impossible not to talk their book.

‘Second point, I don’t think it’s a question of it’ll never be signed. What ****es me off is their failure to use the insight they have and give us a truly candid interpretation.

They’ve never been right. Happy to be corrected.

That’s not possible - or they lack candour.

Perhaps I’m being naive to expect that in AIM?

I agree with you. I hope I’m wrong. I am invested. Have been for years.

The BoD have best insight obviously. But what we read and what they achieve is the big disconnect. Always has been.

Which brings us back to timescales.

Hopefully those “cusps” (three months ago and no comment since, so not really on the cusp at all, in the real world) are negotiations that PF is directly involved with.

But does it make any difference if we’re directly involved in negs or not. The poor timescale calls seem to me, to be omnipresent.

Are these (several cusps) just more examples of poor judgement on timescale. In addition to Ghana (30 days), and Africa (radio silence now - and no meaningful explanation) and Iran (last few issues 2016). 2018’s “At leasts”..... 2015’s targets.... etc. Saudi sounds like Qatar. Anyone remember that?

So much promise at the AGM, a spookily familiar scenario, nothing materialising subsequently though.. Not unusual.
I didn’t think it was possible this year, but I’m beginning to think they can do it again... Anything is possible.

Not long to find out.

I thought that MPS were unable to finalise terms with WSG until their own position was agreed with GPHA. Sounded reasonable. It appears though, that MPS have now agreed terms with WSG - and WSG are happy with those terms.

How is this now possible without MPS having a clear position with GPHA?

If however it all still depends on negotiations (and always did) twixt GPHA and MPS as we all understood and PF can’t be expected to comment on timescales relating to negotiations that he is directly involved, what are these time frames issued/inferred from the BoD based on?

“30 days”. Specific, but clearly boIIocks. ‘Coming weeks” largely meaningless given WSG history and fully “operational and finalised”. If you accept that he can’t have a clue - because he isn’t involved - then these comments are presumably just throw away remarks to maintain interest.

I also don’t buy that we aren’t being updated by MPS. I think it follows that both MPS and WSG are poor at interpreting where they are at with GPHA. Being paid (what?) is perhaps a mixed blessing. It takes pressure off MPS to sign. “You’re being paid, what’s the problem?”

This, like everything at WSG, could run and run.

Nothing on the book suggesting something close now eh Jimzi.

Still, if the board are all agreed and sitting on their hands - they’ve got spare bandwidth to focus on those KrispyKusps.