Member Info for Joeman1

This is fast track for a junior explorator trying to take an opportunity from initial investigation through to production..... not sure where the impatience comes from..... im fairly chilled here...

The lack of trades is due to the imminent nature of the news and the history of it underwhelming. .... people are not buying in on the hope anymore. ... they are happy to watch and react on the news..... imo the difference when the permits land will be BUY on news..... not sell.... because people will expect the SR to conclude shortly afterwards. ....

Doubt it's tomorrow now. .... nothing much happening to suggest the word is out..... lets hope by Wednesday next week or we will have blown another month waiting. ....... this is like a form of Chinese water torture......

As a commodity which can be liquidated as quickly as the money in you high street cash machine.... stockpiling gold doesn't make us unprofitable. ...it just isn't as visible on the balance sheet, or in JDAU's words visible with a simple calculation (dont bite JD).

Or sell when the next market crash sends gold prices higher.....

Im always eloquent when my eyes are watering.....

JDAU really? You are spending your morning defending the apparent shortfall that posters are highlighting by explaining that they are stockpilling. .... from memory you did this last quarter too..... and you don't think that they need to spell it out for us? My evidence is in the last 20 posts m'laud....

Stockpiled over the past 2 quarters would be over £300k at today's ~£900/ounce..... nearly £350k at 2016 prices..... or am I missing something?

I at least think there should be a statement on there to highlight that we are stockpiling gold produced..... waiting for a gold price increase.... if that is what Colin is doing then it is a company strategy that we should be made aware of in my opinion..... plus gold on hand would demonstrate that the company liquidity is being maintained. .... as gold can be liquidated easily to pay debtors (just ask Ramsdens)

I also like your optimism Baxter but to declare. ... 2 years in and first post this morning. ... followed by such definitive positive statements on things that might be true but are far from being hard facts..... up to 20 posts already.... you do realise you are fitting a AIM discussion board type fit? Too obvious im afraid. ... no matter how much I want your posts to be true

Im sure you are right. ... they are playing the field.... but for their 29% stake they stand to make eyewatering amounts of money.... so I see all the positive information flows as cementing their relationship with us.... or was that the point you were making NED?

Im already of the mind that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark ".... but lets hope that whoever is pulling the strings allows enough play for the permits to be issued this week and a conclusion of the SR within a couple of weeks...... an EGM before years end would be a route to continued existence if none of this happens however if we get to that point without permits then the writing will be on the wall.......spray painted on the ARSO building. ...... "scousse"

Don't worry mate.... wasn't having a go at you.... but we have been told that some of the correspondence received by ARSO was out of order. .... I was only alluding to the bad stuff

I wouldn't take her tweet as an indication of delay....... she has probably been on the receiving end of some disgruntled Slovenian telling her how upset they are at continued e-mail abuse.... so she felt the need to comment on respecting due process of a foreign government department. .... RNS this week in my opinion (hope)

She isn't directly answerable to Ascent shareholders Pharaoh. ... dont know what you were expecting. ...... were you unhappy she added #AST or that she included a dig at people that have been bemoaning ARSO for the length of time the permit has taken?

Agree with your points Convex.... apart from technology improvements ...ok improved since the fields weRe originally in operation.... but since the 200 million NPV figure was calculated? Anyway... it is worth highlighting that the 200 million was an NPV estimate.... since 2008 the cost of project work has been relatively flat due to the effect of crash of the oil and gas industry so the benefits of higher gas prices should be accentuated. .... if only we are given half a chance to get it out of the ground to sell it.

You misunderstood me.... 15million secured loan to buy and build the processing equipment. Secured against the equipment....you may be better placed to comment on the point at which this becomes possible for a company without revenue. .... but my thoughts were JORC, mine development plan and business case.. .. followed by a mining permit... then the money could be leveraged this way. The remaining 35million to develop the mine is the equivalent of 6 months forward selling of lithium..... again in my opinion a no brainer.... and circumvents the Chinese limitations on exporting money that limited the initial investment. ....

As you say... time will tell.... but by end of H1 next year we may have everything in place to facilitate the plant being built using g a bank loan.... im thinking that the remaining 35million plus required can be gained from forward selling to the Chinese via the takeoff agreement. ... the value of which will be more than double the 35 million every year going forward....... look at the massive investment in Sirrius and so much of that is in years of forward selling..... we need <1 year. ... on the question of more shares for the Chinese. ... I know it is a risk/possibility but they have publicly stated that they have no interest in buying the company. ...and nothing is done out of kindness.... they get 30% of the profit back from their own investment. .... the investment can be fast tracked so they can secure supplys to their factories earlier.... and they can recoup all investments earlier. ... without having to operate as a mining company....... nothing is set in stone (apart from the lithium) but it is a probable scenario in my opinion

Im just asking a question this time.... is it true that ONE of the problems with one of the permit applications was that wrong company name for Geo had been used in the form? It was reported that this was the claim ARSO made last month when defending the fact that they hadn't deviated from standard process (other than to give more and more chances for us to respond to queries)..... are you saying the report was fake news? If so I take back some of my first post and say instead this whole sorry affair needs to be scrutilised. ...

TPT.... I really don't want to end up in a bun fight but if it is a specialist 3rd party consultant that submitted the paperwork...then why are they still employed if they have used the wrong company names on submittions and consistently been late with responses? Or have we been exposed to fake ARSO statements by Russia again.....