Member Info for isas

Exactly the point I was making, the board keep moving goal posts and changing the narrative so at any given point they can't be pinned down. Then they give you the ultimate blackmail to get to give up your pre-emption rights and demand increase in headroom.

It would be interesting to know a detailed business case for the dumpers and excavators. It looks more like some ones idea of I like those toys and lets get the idiot investors to cough up some money for them.

TBTT- When SSGI came in they had proviso that any future investments they would have the right to participate or 1st refusal as any other financier on the same or equal terms, I suppose that broke down when Vast opted for Mercuria, there is no saying they will hold a grudge if a very attractive proposition came along like diamonds, they are afterall our partners or bosses at PP- don't really know as good a speculation as any other.

Or SSGI could be one of the cornerstone investors, intriguing indeed!

would be interesting to see what Pickstone is making and how close to sulphides it is when the 4th quarterlies are released.

Thanks SS459 for disentangling the RNS - letshope you are right.

When does the clock for Mercuria replacement funding start from? the so called 4to 6 week period!

Seems to be a monopoly game with buys/sells and cancelled trades.

VM regarding your post at 12.12, AP mentioned that the lead time for ordering trucks etc. was 6 months from the deposit being paid towards end of June. Either this was correct or or a misleading statement, he did not say they would defer their arrival date because of the winter (which appears to be a mild one so far). I am not quite sure what these extra costs would be, It would be better to have them as soon as possible so they could be commissioned in an orderly manner and any issues ironed out and operators trained. we should not provide excuses for missing deadlines to AP and allowing him to change goal posts. I also hold and am hopeful that in time if properly managed should at least reach our recent peaks and a bit more. But it is important for the bod to develop some trust on delivering what they say and not keep changing goal posts.

Where are the Q&A's that were suppose to guide our voting choices for the egm?

when do we expect the answers from the company, does anyone know?

FHP- agree this diamond stuff has been a distraction from the company's main business, let the board concentrate on that and if diamonds do come along then treat that as a bonus, don't let the tail wag the dog.

It would be good to have a preview of the questions sent if possible.

GKB47- good one normally would find it amusing but being too close to the truth and nursing heavy paper losses in Vast can't laugh.

Angus- AP is the public face of the BoD, they need to have a coherent strategy and a sustainable financial plan to achieving it. At the moment it appears like a scattergun approach, every few months a new asset is identified and and becomes a must have item at all cost, previous high profile projects are downgraded. The company and bod need to recognise they must monetise assets before grabbing new ones. The current strategy needs to change to reflect our financial position- we're not Man City or Real Madrid but more like Portsmouth- we have to sell to buy.

Thanks Lee, good constructive call, will submitt some later to the email address given.

That makes sense. Why not do that in the 1st place back when we got Baita license, put Carlibaba on the back burner?

Sorry Super didn't mean to give you heart attack, It's my sarcastic cap!

we are already at the 6 billion level and may get to 8 billion if the headroom is increased. My worry is that AP in trying to make a mid-tier miner may have actually meant that he would so by increasing the shares in issue to a hundred billion. (sincerely hope not).

I am not sure that it being a surprise to AP and the bod can be taken as a relief- at best they must be naive and should have intervened much earlier and asserted themselves.