Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
I suspect that the increase in shares is down to one of two issues. Either the directors have found a way to issue some further shares to a party friendly to them without issuing an RNS or they have just made another of their many mistakes and added up the numbers wrongly. I strongly encourage you to email them and find out what they answer is, but I would not hold my breath for a reply.
The idea that the both sides are acting in concert to take Reabold private is utterly ludicrous. It is so completely beyond the scope of all realism that it barely merits an answer. I can only think that it is a deliberate attempt muddy the waters further and deliberately prevent people voting to change the board.
First off, the two sides are firmly opposed to each other, as can be seen from the previous requisition. Secondly, the share buyback program has once again been so pathetic that it has only spent about £118k and purchased a mere 1% of the company stock. Not enough to make any material difference to the voting even if S&S find some way to make this stock vote in their favour which I hope that they would not be permitted to do. Thirdly, the completely barmy idea that the shares being taken out of circulation would only increase the percentage of the requisitioners share – it clearly has the same affect on all shares.
The company could potentially go into administration if the current directors carry on investing money in their usual spendthrift way. However, there is an easy way to stop this happening in future. Support the requisition and kick them out.
It's not the proposed directors that have released an RNS that appears to contain false information though is it.
Why did they say that the Colle Santo Environmental Approval permit had been filed on December 20th when it quite evidently had not been.
That is an important question to answer. IF they announced this knowing it was untrue then they have deliberately lied to shareholders. If they announced it thinking it was true then it raises more questions about both theirs and the nomad's due diligence.
After all, Stephen himself said: “it is quite difficult for us to be misleading and sense that every communication we make generally via RNS has to be signed off by our Nomad so we have to provide proof of the validity of everything we're saying before it gets approved.”
What proof was provided that the application had been filed?
I wonder if Reabold and Strand Hanson will respond to the latest statement from the requisitioners website? There are definitely some serious questions to answer here about the veracity of the information in that last Colle Santo RNS.
I loved the comment from Stephen WIlliams about how everything they say is the truth simply because they say it. It pretty much sums them up.
Heid, has Kamran sent a copy to Reabold?
What I find fascinating on this board is how nobody actually wants to engage in any discussion about the company itself. Simon called nonsense on the figures that were being talked about spent on Danube and Daybreak and when I showed him that the £14.3 million came from Reabold's own annual reports and RNS releases he no longer wished to discuss the matter.
Simon's response to any questions about financials is to post links to terrible music and Watts simply resorts to abuse. I have asked the question repeatedly, can anybody give me one positive reason to support S&S in the upcoming requisition based on their track record of management at RBD and not one person has managed to provide one. Not a single reason.
Why is that?
Simon, the market defines the value of the company and at the moment it is valued at £11 million.
That is despite the company having raised £46 million in cash from investors and despite the fact that they have received around £10 million from the sale of Victory.
The current valuation reflects the fact that £14.3 million has been spent on the disastrous US and Romanian projects and the fact that they have invested £4.3 million in an Italian project that has been going nowhere for over a decade.
Think about that, £46 million raised and a current valuation of £11 million. By any standards, that is a disaster. And the responsibility for this disaster lays firmly at the door of the joint CEOs. That is why I want them gone.
Slalom1, if that comment was directed at me, I am intrigued. What defamatory content do you believe I have posted? I am happy to discuss it with you but I would like to know what, specifically, I ma being accused of first.
Firstly Watts, Kyle is not a member of "my team" as you put it. I represent myself . It is not my fault that you and your board-hugging buddies do not like it if anyone has an opposing view to yourself. I am voting to get rid of S&S because I am sick of this lies and the £14.3 million they have wasted on Danube and Daybreak which they now want us to forget about and describe as non-core projects.
I have not forgotten about them and I want them to be held responsible for their failings.
S&S have paid themselves £4 million over five years and this is an outrageous amount of money. You may not mind, but I do.
You may not mind that the company have wasted £14.3 million on failed projects, but I do.
You may not mind that they've lied about the Colle Santo 24 month production and that they have lied again about the submission of the environmental report., but I do.
You may not mind that they have spent £4.3 million that should have been funding West Newton on Colle Santo, but I do.
You may not care that they have given away over 10% of the company's equity, which is 10% of the shareholding in West Newton for a potentially worthless project in Italy in order to try and win the requisition, but I do.
That is why I am voting them out.
In arguing that a 95% drop is bad but a 94.29% drop is acceptable and stating that you don't care if the company lies to shareholders about the progress of Colle Santo, it seems to me that you are the one who is making a fool of himself Watts.
As you well know Watts, the important point about the EIA is not that it has not been filed. The important point is that S&S issued an RNS saying that it had been filed and commenting that this showed how the investment was great as it demonstrated that "LNEnergy continues to progress the approval process for both the long-term test programme and full field development."
Except it turns out that it hasn't been filed and no progress has been made. Another lie. Surely even you must be getting sick of the lies now?
4 days until the 10am closing for voting on Monday 8th January
6 days until the vote is held and S&S finally get kicked off the gravy train
13 days since we were told that the Colle Santo Environmental Application had been filed, yet it still has not shown up on the Italian government website: https://va.mite.gov.it/it-IT/Procedure/ViaElenco/3/2
PD1 I have just looked at the RNS link you posted more closely and the wording used in there is very interesting, It says:
"LNEnergy reported that on 20 December 2023 it filed the Environmental Impact Study ("EIS") for the new small-scale liquefied natural gas (LNG) development plan at the Colle Santo gas field with the Ministry of Environment and Energy Security. This is a further step towards achieving the granting of a production concession at Colle Santo."
Note that they do not say that "it has been filed". They say that "LNEnergy reported" that it has been filed. LNEnergy being a private company have no obligation to get any of their releases checked for veracity by a nomad and, of course, RBD have just given LNEnergy £4.3 million of shareholders money...
It doesn't take much of a stretch of the imagination to see how this could work. "Hey guys, give us a letter saying you have filed the EIA and we'll announce that you've said you have filed it. We're telling the truth, and you can't get in any trouble for lying".
I cannot say for certain that this is definitely what has happened but it would certainly be a sneaky way of using a private company to do a public company's dirty work for them wouldn't it?
The one thing we do no for sure, as it is a matter of public record, is that the EIA was NOT filed on the 20th December as RBD announced.
P1D - I doubt it. It seems certain that this Environmental Impact Assessment was not filed despite what we were told in the RNS.
I have just had another look at the Italian Ministry of the Environment and Energy Security website just now and the Colle Santo filing is still not up there. However there is now a filing that somebody else made dated 2/1/2024. It can all be seen here: https://va.mite.gov.it/it-IT/Procedure/ViaElenco/3/2
. I agree, it is very suspicious that they will not release the minutes of the meeting at the request of one of the attendees. It clearly indicates that there is something to hide within those very minutes.
But does that surprise anybody? There seem to be a lot of hidden elements and a lot of lies told at RBD.
5 days until the 10am closing for voting on Monday 8th January
7 days until the vote is held and S&S finally get kicked off the gravy train
12 days since we were told that the Colle Santo Environmental Application had been filed, yet it still has not shown up on the Italian government website: https://va.mite.gov.it/it-IT/Procedure/ViaElenco/3/2
Simon, you do come out with some absolute nonsense on so many levels. Not only is what you have stated about Daybreak completely untrue, but even if it was true it just provides a further example of why S&S are completely incapable of running Reabold.
Who on earth has ever heard of a deal being put in place for a company to sell an asset that they have spent £9.3 million on in exchange for a vague promise that some wells would be drilled but nothing put in writing. All of these sort of deals are always contracted off with penalty clauses and clawbacks put in for failure to deliver.
It’s a good thing for S&S that Simon is just making things up as if he were telling the truth it would prove that S&S were totally incompetent, instead of just merely awful.
When your defence makes the people you are defending look even worse than the original charges did it shows how desperate you have become.