Member Info for gotreal

Its a sea of red across the tech stocks in the US right now due to The Donald's threatening behaviour towards Iran... IQE is bound to be influenced by what is happening globally. SIVE is down 17%....

Why, have you put a short on...?? 🤡

Poor old wacky didn't get a pay out on his short.... so he's taking the ball away....

Colon... you are t;w;a;t.

Seis: "Imagine that... AI spitting out incorrect information nicely packaged to look good." And imagine, Gump posting it as if it were fact without actually checking... who'd have thought it...

As for s;h;i;tforbrains: "Price risen since announcement because people are aware that if price fall now more shares will be issued for $1,5 million. " So apparently, probably by telepathy, we have all clubbed together and bought more shares to ensure the mystery investor doesn't get them any cheaper.... it beggars belief that anyone could be so twisted as to suggest that... or stupid, of course.

Justgiveup: "It doesn't matter if copper price is 15k or more... if you vote yes share price will go down below 2.5p." Funny that's it has risen since the announcement was made then, isn't it.... This is utter tripe from someone who simply hates the company, who WANTS to see the share price fall and is prepared to claim anything to further that aim. OK, brain(less)... explain why it will.

And your point is?

Looter: "You assume LWP and Roan have value. There is no evidence of that to date." That'll be why we have sold ~5% of the LWP project material for $6.75 million ... what a waste of space....

Gump: "2 wrongs etc. Costs nothing to be nice" Yes it does! And why be nice to people who constantly lie to try influence others...?? They deserved to be shamed and called out for what they are.

Gump... "Just corrected on the facts, not insulted or ridiculed. " Not when they do it habitually.... Why should posters have to continuously correct those who deliberately lie? Instead call them out for what they are....

4el ... "Personal attacks on members who put forward contrary points of view, should be regarded with the contempt they deserve." What, even when the "contrary points of view" are outright lies .... Like, for example, HDS claiming that Ollie Oliveira was given 25 million shares in the company when in fact he received none and indeed bought 326,000? Such people deserve no respect, only disdain and ridicule.

What was the point of the previous post.... it had been known about for more than a month...

And ....??

Why do you claim that? Explain. Who said they NEED the money, as in, they are short of money? Companies always need funds and the more they have the more they can do.... but it doesn't mean they have no money. You are saying that.... Urgency? What urgency?

Gump... you say "Wheres the 25m SA receipts gone?" Why do you think it has gone? There is nothing to suggest it has apart from your fever imagining. Or are you trying to imply that taking this money from a HNW proves they none left...?? In which case you are a FOOL.

Chatterer...

"If JLP don't NEED the money, why does the RNS state that they're taking the money regardless of the vote's outcome? Surely, if this is all about this wonderful investor bringing their expertise, the money would only be taken as an INVESTMENT and not a LOAN?" "the money would only be taken as an INVESTMENT and not a LOAN?" I really have no idea what you mean by that.. what would he get for his INVESTMENT if not a share in the company? The investor is wanting shares and a CLN is a way of getting them that avoids the uncertainty of buying in the market but relies on it being converted to shares. This requires that the authority, WHICH IS A STANDARD REQUEST BY EVERY COMPANY AT EVERY AGM, Rolls Royce, Tesco, Barclays all do it, to issue shares is in place. If it isn't then the preferential rate of interest on the CLN "will be increased to align with interest rates on typical medium term unsecured loan funding and the loan will be repayable within twelve months after the drawdown date." So if, in the very unlikely event, that shareholders are foolish enough to vote against granting the power to allot shares to a High Net Worth individual with a demonstrable track record in developing mining assets, who represents a ready source of investment, and who could make a strategic and operational impact on the rate of progress of Molefe's development, to the benefit of ALL shareholders, then as compensation he will receive a market rate of interest for just one year, as compensation.

"P.S. it's actually $11.5 million." No, it isn't. It might be in the long term but initially it is just $1.5 million. As usual, you attempt to twist the facts to the worst case scenario...

So you have no position here but still you turn up daily to bellyache....?? "hopefully ch isnt negoatiating a jv or we are fooked.".. Well, obviously, you aren't as you have no position. Why not find something else to do?

"But you carry on trying to paint a rosy picture." No, I carry on painting a factual picture. Your faux outrage at not being provided with every little bit of information your heart might desire is very boring and now wearing rather thin. Your activist investor sham persona doesn't wash. I repeat, please explicitly record here what the lies are that you claim have been told by the company so we are all well aware.

Gump ... "What they have not explained anywhere is where the 25m was spent? Why they desperately need 1.5m." Why do you make this stuff up? Where is your proof that they have spent the $25 million from the SA sale? As was clearly expressed by the FD, they were approached by an investor. They do not NEED the $1.5 million .... Either you are attempting to deceive people... or you are simply stupid if you cannot understand how large investors operate behind the scenes.... and companies do not turn down a gift horse when it is to the benefit of the company and its shareholders, whether you believe it is or not. Maybe you would like to explicitly list the lies that have been told, for the record.

Bobbin... a good question. The quality of communications has been questionable for years. It is as though those writing/signing off RNS' do not consider what effect the words they use will have...which is bizarre. To say that the money has been "secured" does imply that it was really needed when quite clearly it was an opportunistic approach by the HNW to get a slice of the action, not sought by the company.