Member Info for Impecunious2

Good to see a bit of volume today. It's nice not to be ignored.

Hi, Chatty

I presume you're replying to Roger at 16.12, not Stout at 16.18. If so, I agree with you.

Best wishes

Hi, Stout

I'm glad you're still with us. I don't blame rats for deserting the sinking ship; but I don't believe this particular ship is sinking.

Best wishes

Hi, Ageos

Thanks for this, as always.

It's good to hear from someone who knows something, unlike most of us who know nothing (or, to be more precise, nothing relevant).

Hi, rejucht

There's no connection between the gold price and an explorer. A producer, yes; but not an explorer, because production is too uncertain and too far off in the future (by which time the gold price may have fallen).

I have some doubts about the wisdom of putting news out in the middle of (or late in) the trading day. Perhaps it's better to follow tradition, and release news at one minute past seven, in the morning, so that traders can respond to it, when they're fully functioning.

I've just listened to the proactive interview with Sean Wade; and been reassured by it. He seems competent to me.

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1008687/power-metal-resources-incoming-ceo-to-continue-with-existing-strategy-1008687.html

Hi, Bhargav

Thanks for the passage from Turner Pope in para 3. The reporting of drill results sounds uncertain: "may recognise... possibly permitting, etc." I assume full and timely reporting is one of the things Louis and Brad are fighting for.

Without news, the share price is not going to recover. That much is clear.

I think he's unlikely to sell out early, as he did with GGP. POW's much more his baby (his time at GGP was very brief); and he sold his GGP holding at a substantial profit (though of course, he should have held longer), which would not be the case, if he sold his POW holding now.

Apologies for the enigmatic message a few minutes ago. But it's not as good as Donald Trump's "covfefe," which is the only thing I admire him for.

I t

I am sorry to hear this. Whether it's PJ's own health, or that of his wife or children, is hard to tell. But I wish them well.

Hi, Karl

I think Ageos is more likely to be right on this (see his post earlier today). It's money spent on the Brazil and Argentina projects. Well-spent, in my view.

But some money has probably gone to pay lawyers and tax advisers to set up the new company.

If the share price was as good as the chatboard, we'd all be in the money.

Hi, Chicken

I greatly respect your honesty for telling us what you've done. It's easy to tell a chatboard that you've bought; much harder, to tell everyone that you've sold. I've gone for option (i) myself; but that's because I've never liked selling.

Hi, Seingred

If one thinks about it, whether dilution is a good or bad thing depends on the quality of the management. If the money raised is spent wisely, the shareholders are not going to complain. I must have been diluted multiple times holding GGP for many years; but it didn't prevent me from making a capital gain.

At some point, there will be fund-raises for the two new projects. But one cannot say that that must be bad for the share price, because we don't know what will be discovered in those locations. We're lucky to have Ageos as a commentator, because he understands the geology, which most of us do not.

As it happens, I trust Brad's judgement as a geologist, and also believe that he sincerely wishes the company to prosper. Any negative remarks I have made about him, apply only to his PR skills (where Paul Johnson at POW is exemplary, in my view).

Hi, Roger

I agree with the first sentence; this decline is not artificial, or manipulated. Some of the rises and falls in OMI (which I also hold) seem to me much more questionable.

Hi, Ageos

Thanks for bringing some sense into this discussion. It's obvious that an exploration company has to spend money, in order to explore. If Greatland had refused to spend any money, they never would have found Havieron.

Hi, Corby

My own view (fwiw) is that they sometimes push the price up, to encourage people to buy (through FOMO), and sometimes push it down, to frighten people into selling. Their aim is to increase the volume of transactions.

But these are short-term devices. Over the medium term, it's a matter of supply and demand, and the share price will reflect that.

I knew a jobber once in the '70's, and he was a thoroughly unpleasant character. But they can't all be like that; and besides, he must have retired, by now.

Hi, Seingred

Issuing new shares is not in and of itself a problem for the existing shareholders. It only becomes one, if the issue price is at a discount to the share price at the time. It almost always is; but there are exceptions. Paul Johnson at POW has done a couple of fund-raises at no discount, which have therefore had no effect on the share price. Do I believe that Brad is able to command the same level of investor confidence? No.

A million $ doesn't go far these days. Perhaps Brad decided to buy some tomatoes and olive oil.