Member Info for JerseyCrew

Daniel - turd? really??

- I am not aware of auditors entering into a contract with a deadline. I see you have totally avoided the point raised by Robbie about no work being done on a file for a number of weeks. If untrue then Robbie could have opened himself up to a world of litigious pain. I don't think he is that stupid.

- your money on a company doing it right because it's a global auditor - big does not mean doing it right - I am sure that there are many sub postmasters that would drive a wagon through that particular arguement. Having worked in FTSE 100 companies I can tell you from personal experience, decisions are made by individuals and individuals are fallible irrespective of the organisation they work for at the time. That can also leave the organisation and leave havoc in their wake. You are naive if you think otherwise.

- Remember the RNS would have been vetted by advisers - you are correct in that Companies House will need to be on board with the situation as well - however if GCAT can show evidence they are doing all in their power then Companies House will not take action on a date alone.

- The RNS will have been vetted for wording - it has to be factual - what would you have said under the circumstances?

- Fully agree - Caracal absolutely need PFK - and they need PFK to deliver - over to PFK!

I see the bid is slightly over 1p - start of things?

Another large trade 1.9M?

Oh JWB - ok I'll continue to play...

1. Can you start by answering my repeated question on cross over please - it will help your credibility in my eyes. Can you back up your explanation by facts. You are not stating as an opinion but as a fact...

2. Can you elaborate on the dire track record and how has this impacted you in the past?

3. Do you acknowledge that an SPV has to be formed (not a quick process with KYC etc etc with Banks these days) before money is transferred and do you seriously expect to hear when that happens via an RNS?

4. The permit is an issue that every investor here knows needs to be addressed - do you seriously think that the new JV partner is unaware or isn't confident in obtaining? Successful businessmen tend to be successful for a reason...

5. Investors named - seems a sticking point with you. If you don't trust the BoD and their legal team to do the proper due diligence why bother to be invested? I have asked whether you are invested but you have chosen not to answer which of course is your prerogative but does raise questions as to the motivation for your posts.

Over to you JWB...

I sometimes think of the market as a virtual revolving door - buyers and sellers entering and exiting - if the door spins too fast you risk getting smacked in the face!

Typo- apologies - hard investors should read hurt investors

Speculation on my part but as well as smaller investors coming in, there does appear to be at least one big money player is is happy to accrue and walk up the SP in an orderly fashion. Nice and steady is my preferred trajectory - this isn't a sprint and no one gets hurt in the process with big spikes.

Daniel - a few observations on your post:

- Its not rare for this particular auditor to be late - they have recent form with another company as per my recent post

- can you elaborate on your point about internal and contractual deadline please - not sure what your point is here

- PFK are not small - they are global - what's your point?

- Agreed they are unlikely to find another auditor in the timescales required - doesn't stop me from wishing they could though

- Death knoll for a listing? No - not if they can demonstrate to the FCA that the auditor walked away and GCAT were not at fault. The role of the FCA is principally to protect investors - why would they take that action to delist and hard investors? The FCA would be in the line of fire and they don't tend to stick their neck out too far.

- Achieved from what exactly?

Thanks

Another large trade posted?? 4M? Just looking at the google chart

Hi JWB.

Every project has risks and you only need to invert the detail in the RNS and include the phrase, what if this doesn't happen. Every milestone and action has a contra risk and then it comes down to a personal view on magnitude / impact / timelines / mitigation / cost / likelihood of event.

You have chosen to repeatedly highlight the permit issue and you are 100% correct in that this is a milestone that needs to be overcome - its a show stopper. So here is my view on that - yes its a risk but I have invested in the company because I am trusting the fact, rightly or wrongly, that the BoD alongside the consortium of businessmen have actually considered this milestone and believe that it can be overcome. If SK did not want mining and the job creation and tax revenue it would generate, not to mention a source of gold that there own CB might want to purchase in the global clammer for gold, then I think that they would have identified this obstacle and wouldn't be putting their money into the venture. So I have personally considered the risk and I have been happy to invest on my risk assessment. Is it guaranteed - of course not - what is? Is an an acceptable risk for me? Yes- I think the risk / reward scenario here is acceptable for my risk appetite.

Your comment that the leadership is poor - it's in the BoD's own financial interest to bolster any gaps if there are any.

Greyness about supposed investors .... supposed is an unusual word to use - do you think they don't exist? This was revealed on the back of an RNS - lie on these and it's career ending frankly.

Large shareholders desperate for liquidity - well I am not a large shareholder but I am a shareholder that has been invested for years and currently underwater. Would I like to be in profit on paper? Of course. Does that cause me to spend time on here giving my point of view - only so much in that I am genuinely excited at the future prospect of this company because I think it is going to make me money in the future.

At the risk of repeating my question from yesterday - would you mind elaborating on the cross over statement and what are you thoughts on the 2 large purchases this morning please?

Thanks

Of course we saw 2 trades like this yesterday afternoon and JWB suggested it was a cross over - I didn't and still don't understand what he meant although I have politely for an explanation. In the absence of another answer I am thinking it's the same investor loading up.

I guess there is a premium on a large transaction like that - but would suggest from someone with money who hasn't got the time or inclination to layer the trades - looking at the bigger picture where fractions of a penny become slightly irrelevant perhaps?

I would dearly love them to get another auditor but options might be limited and possibly better the devil you know having gone through this exercise / pain with bringing this audit team up to speed. One thing is for sure - for obvious reasons we need to see evidence that the company is fully on top of its financials going forward - I hope lessons have been learned but again I don't think this was from incompetence personally - just a lack of resource / cash.

Taking their time?

Whilst it was an unofficial update can I remind you of the words Robbie used in his email to an investor and shared on this platform:

"We had a deadline of end Feb which we didn’t miss it was missed by PKF and for the month of March and half of April they then did no work on our file - they recommenced work a week ago and are very near completion. I have asked them daily for a timing and they simply refuse to give one they simply say they are working on it. "

I suspect that Robbie might have got into hot water for being so transparent in that email but clearly he was as frustrated as hell with the lack of progress from the auditors. The tone from yesterdays RNS was very different of course as this was a public announcement and Im sure he would not want a fight with the auditors over wording and add further delay - but even then its clear that they are waiting on a timeline from the auditors.

So here is my personal take on it - there is taking time and there is taking no action - and it looks like the auditors are guilty of the latter. We can get into the history and why we got here - we know all of that and we know the reasons - but we don't know the reasons why the auditor effectively did no work on this file for a period of time when we were in suspension and that is annoying.

JWB - you have mentioned DISH a couple of times now. Were you stung on a previously investment there?

You keep repeating about the permits- not sure why given the company have been transparent in terms of requirements and a major reason that a local JV partner is the way to go here. You also mention the lack of a cash advance now but ignore the fact that an SPV has to be created to facilitate this.

What do you think you know that we don’t know as investors please?

If you could elaborate on the roll over comments from yesterday as well that would be helpful. Not challenging you on that - I just want to learn. Thanks

JWB - an agreement has been signed by a consortium of businessmen- they have been looking at this for some time. They have entered into a legal contract. You seem to be grasping at straws with your what ifs. You could apply that logic to every agreement in every RNS - errrrr don’t think so. Serious money by serious businessmen. Can I ask - are you invested here?

Full marks for persistency - no idea about the content - thankfully

I have to confess I am not sure what you mean by rollover in this context JWB - would you mind explaining? Genuine question.

Yes it has been in the dumps for ages - I have been on the journey for years. No I don't know the people - do I need to?

No money yet - of course not - they have just signed the JV agreement and the consortium now need to set up an SPV - all takes a little time. The sums are commensurate with the work - the big money starts flowing in stage 3 when it becomes required i.e sampling, drilling, trenching, dewatering, permitting, mapping, surveys, technical studies (including the Development Report, environmental studies, acquiring land, feasibility studies and/or studies of resources and reserves) and governmental or local stakeholder liaison.

We know that permitting is required - you have said that - and that is why the locals are best equipped to deliver.

Interested to learn about this rollover business please - thanks

Thanks Charles - I think the RNS is clear but if you can point to a time point on the video it would be good to listen again.

What a lovely post to read skier - thanks