Member Info for GreenWolf

Teaye - I couldn't possibly comment. The danger of course is obvious, but spikes allow those of us trying to reduce our average and put some cash back in our pockets to take advantage. Let's hope it is good news - I certainly have a much smaller paper loss sitting on my screen at the moment than I did yesterday evening.

There's been some quiet block buying during May.....
GW

Teaye - I suspect there is a RNS in the offing, but what would I know. :-))

JohnZ - depends if you're talking gross or net. Aerial will help you - he knows everything and is nearly at his 19,000 so needs the posts. I have month end to cover off today so I can't engage with him. :-)

Aerial

Just for your info I went through a listing and IPO process in 2002 as a Director so know a bit about "funding" as you call it. And before you ask I'm covered by a NDA until my 65th birthday so don't ask me any additional questions on here. If I do ever meet you, or anyone else from this board, I'll happily share my experience. I've also been a Director for one or two PLCs, as I am one now.

Your view on "loss" is factually incorrect but it is pointless debating with you as you are never wrong, but a company loss is when ANY expenditure is more than income, which we have via revenue from our working mine. It's not in development and wasn't in 2018s accounts.

AIM companies are not "continually funded" and rely upon raising capital through shares. As demonstrated in our successful raise earlier last year at 0.12, if people don't buy those shares, you don't raise a penny.

Interesting post last night and a clear insight into why we no longer have any meaningful debates anymore on here. You've driven everyone off, even our experts.

And you say you have no agenda.....

Aerial - you're clearly far more knowledgeable than me.

You continue to take some delight in riling people on here. Teaye over the weekend yet another example.

All you ever want to do is talk down to people, talk about things that aren't quite the topic of the post and generally p**s people off.

You'll be accusing me of having an agenda next.....or being someone else.

The fact you have posted almost 19,000 times in six and a half plus years and admitted to having been on here every day for nine years just about sums you up. Empty vessels and all that.

Ujo - trust you've been topping up the last few months.

Aerial - well we've clearly been describing apples and pears between us, but its more around context. I'm on about P&L and our ability to continue as a going concern.

That's the problem, because whatever you or I want to use or describe it as, you can't spend more than you bring in indefinitely.

aerial - you've lost the plot, completely.

aerial - "the company haven't to the best of my knowledge lost a penny"...……...is the hot weather getting to you? I'd also like to understand who's recommended your post, because they have no understanding of P&L either.

Do you understand what cost of sales and revenue mean? And what "loss" means in the accounts?

And what's this rudimentary understanding of AIM and "continually funded" rubbish?

bigeye - it's a great read - I'll lend it to you if you want. All the Annual Reports and accounts are in the appendices, although you need to understand what the figures mean otherwise it's just pages and pages of numbers :-)

Hope your dinner was nice on Friday - sounded lovely

Sausage - "Can't argue with those facts GW". Somebody will - time to switch off.

aerial - most AIM companies used to be funded on the prospect of something becoming reality, although there are a fair few AIM companies that simply use the platform because it has a more flexible approach to governance than the main market.

But that's not the point - it doesn't matter if it's AIM, FTSE 250 or anything. It's the economics. You can't continue to borrow money with limited prospects of paying it back. Investors don't keep pumping money into something that has a diminishing chance of return.

The FACTS are there - we lost £1.2m in 2017 and £1.8m in 2018, yet we were mining for three months in 2017 and 12months in 2018. That simply doesn't add up commercially and you can't continue operating like that indefinitely. The 2019 results are really important, because if the cost of sales has increased and our losses widen, we've got a very big problem, because that means the business model isn't working.

"There is a distinct difference between losing and using money before a Company has reached profitability" - indeed there is, but we're losing AND using money.

We are losing money every single month. Fact.

It doesn't matter whether we have a 10year plan or a 10month plan - if our cost of sales is so much higher than our revenue because we cannot get economies of scale, we will reach a point where we have no more money and, if we can't raise it, we're stuffed. The alternative is you continue to build a pile of debt (which is what is happening) and your breakeven becomes so large to service all that debt that you will never get there, which means shareholders will never get a return. That is exactly why our share price is where it is. It's basic economics.

We are not "well placed" at this point in time, let alone subject to future funding - how long have we been trying to get to break even and getting nowhere, except burning cash? Excuse after excuse as to why we cannot get to 10,000t per month. Our MCap reflects that - there is no confidence in the market that we can get there quick enough to be able to adequately service our debt.

It's not abut believing or not believing what is in RNSs. It's about the balance sheet fundamentals of us losing money and all the fluffy plans, hopes and beliefs of our BoD are irrelevant to how our P&L looks. It really is that simple.

We're due our annual results this month - there needs to be one almighty rabbit pulled out of the hat over the next four weeks. We lost almost £1.8m on our operations in 2018 (our first full year of mining), up from £1.2m in 2017. So, in 2018 we had revenue from sales yet still managed to lose more money than in 2017. That's the huge problem.

aerial - apologies but I've been on a call since 6.30pm discussing the slightly more important thing of saving people's lives and protecting their health.

I'm not going to spend time looking for the number of posts you have talked about the "foresight" of our BoD etc but most people on here will know it's regularly used to defend the BoD and Rufus. Like I say, you keep all the posts on here offline so you could do a search really easily and quickly yourself and share that.

I've concluded you are clearly unwilling to answer the question I've now posted twice.

I don't actually care who you are or who you know (or claim to know). The flip side of that is you have do not know who I am or, similarly, who I know. You have no idea whether I have spoken to or know personally members of our board, past or present, no idea what I have done in relation to Edenville (in a similar way to what Sausage mentioned) and more importantly what influence I have as a shareholder, because you don't actually know either what percentage I own personally or whether I have commercial interests in Edenville via other means. You also have no idea if I know someone that knows you.

The only "perverse obsession" with you is whether you have, or have had, an agenda here, but to be honest I’ll keep my own thoughts on that to myself.

You have spent the best part of nine years on this board (everyday did you say?), take great delight in posting things around buys at full ask, defending Rufus and the BoD etc and generally dismissing people who don't agree with your views. It then tends to fall to a further level around accusing people of not even being invested, being somebody else in disguise or having some other ulterior motive.

You view yourself as an all seeing oracle on this share and better than others because of your number of posts, your attendance at AGMs and the info you gleam from your friendly chats with members of the BoD. What was it you said to Sausage – something around you offered to pay for his train fare to attend the AGM – wouldn’t you find that condescending if someone said that to you?

And when people challenge you, it is indeed full in your face and you look for support of your “mates” to intimidate people, as nicely demonstrated below.

If I had one wish on this share it would be we get an almighty spike so I can sell out at break even and not have to engage with people like you.

I'm off for a beer because the short meeting I've just been on was a little upsetting and puts life into perspective. Despite my rants with you, I'll wish everyone on this board a safe evening.

aerial - still avoiding the question.

Aerial - the question you seem so intent on avoiding has been put in a far more simple form at the bottom of my last post

"So, why are you so quick to both praise and defend our BoD, and in particular Rufus, when they are even mildly criticised on here? Are you on the payroll or something?"

Ah, bigeye - clearly it was you who recommended Aerial's last post and you're helping him out to avoid the really difficult question he's getting asked.

For the third time it is NOT about my investment. We are where we are and I chose to invest here. (Happy now?). But on the same line, it's the BoD's success or failure that drives the market sentiment and share price, not me.

And Aerial - stop the picking on specific words from posts - where in my post did I talk about the success of the company? Perhaps I can point you to hundreds of posts where you have been "trumpeting the success of our BoD especially Rufus", which is the phrase I used. If you do a search on the word "foresight" in the offline copy of posts you have, you can do it yourself in two minutes

So, why you are so quick to both praise and defend our BoD, and in particular Rufus, when they are even mildly criticised on here? Are you on the payroll or something?

aerial - the feeling is mutual but perhaps come out of the politicians outfit and stop avoiding the point.

It's not about buying the shares - that's my decision and I stand by it.

It's about you trumpeting the success of our BoD especially Rufus and why you do this - that's the question.

aerial - "Hardly an e-mail from an investor that has this company's interest at heart" - and what about the company having investors' interests at heart? We could start with communication and shareholder value? They currently seem to be on lockdown around comms – why? You can't furlough everyone - somebody has to run the company.

Rufus has failed - we're losing money, we're in debt and we've tied our assets into a CLF which, if Lind did pull the plug, ends everything. We’re struggling to raise money, paying debt in shares, diluting shareholder value etc etc etc. The “jam tomorrow” line doesn’t wash anymore with the market – our MCap reflects that.

And the failure seems to have come from a decision to start small scale mining without sufficient experience within the ranks to fully understand the risks. That wasn't foresight - that was a reckless decision based upon pound signs. We know it’s gone catastrophically wrong, because that’s why they bought in Alistair’s experience. But four years too late.

The only people really exposed in this are us PIs. A number of us have managed to trade our average's down, but I suspect most PIs here are tens of thousands down. I don’t see anyone within “the company” struggling financially from this?

The dream here was RCPP – in essence that’s gone. A potential fallback to open cast mining has failed and is rapidly consuming more and more borrowed money. That’s the crux of it and all this c**p about foresight of the bod and how brilliant Rufus et al have been is nonsense.

I just don’t get why you keep saying it and surely you can understand why some of us on here simply get riled by it – what exactly has this BoD done for you or any PIs apart from use your money and slowly, but surely, diminish the chances of ever getting a return? I’ve no doubt even you would be out if you could get back to your average.

Aerial - I think the most significant point Sausage seems to be making is your continued defence and praise of a failing / failed CEO, but that's just how I read it. GW