Member Info for JulianM

Whilst progress on it appears to have been incredibly slow ,the end product is a considerable saving when compared with the estimated cost of $321 m in the 2015 Operational Blueprint, which is positive news

Making assumptions over the last few months has proved to be dangerous but surely it is reasonable to assume that if the SSGI situation is not under control at least part of the proceeds of the placement would have been paid to them.This being the case shares going into potentially " sticky hands "rather than those of Bergen is a positive move.

TBTT So what your chrystal ball is telling you is that the Government will fail to honour its undertaking to Red Mercury to grant a licence,Red Mercury will not enter into the proposed Joint Venture Agreement with Vast,despite all the work carried out by both parties to date and will instead partner with one of the 4 and leave Vast as well as BOD out in the cold.Very gloomy prediction I must say and not one that I can accept.In particular breach of the undertaking would be very damaging for the Government,given the identity or Red Mercury.

As far as I am concerned FLBW/TDT is one of the 3 most valuable contributors and in no way deserves to be filtered.Ok he may not suffer fools gladly but unfortunately there are a few fools posting on this board who do not deserve to be suffered gladly if indeed at all.

It is good news that there are prospects of another offtaker becoming involved soon which is far preferable to a fire sale of assets which some have been advocating.Of course the fact that discussions are(apparently) so advanced gives credence to the argument that AP must have known that completion of T2 was at best very much in doubt.

Beyond Slovenia.Would like to think that they have one or more specific projects in mind.

Construction licence issued and it will be interesting to see whether they can obtain funding

Credibility of AP entirely on the line and in gambling terms anyone holding rather than selling is betting that the prospects of success in terms of T2 arriving within the 30 day period is rather more than 50/50.One could be forgiven for taking the view that based on the comments of AP it is nearer the 90/10 mark but against this there is a worrying history of over optomistic comments about speed of progress on a number of issues

Entirely agree with you both as to the Company itself and also the contributors to this Board, which is not populated by idiots, unlike all too many of the Boards

Very much would need Bergen to play ball and be happy with another fat fee only,because to get TB2 an EGM will have to be called and the date of it will be after the first date that Bergen can convert TB1 If this is the play and say we receive notice tomorrow of an EGM we would have to be told the true purpose of claiming TB2 and Bergens agreement not to convert TB1 otherwise it is likely to be assumed that Bergen could well convert,
Regardless of this any news of further delay over TM2 will not be well received given the apparent optomism of AP that TM2 will arrive before the 30 day period expires so that TB1 can be paid off

To my mind prospects of success are the essential factor to be considered.This could unlock the door to legal expenses insurance being available to assist over funding and provide insurance against the cost of failure if Ascent were to be at risk of a legal costs order against the Company, which would be the position in the UK

Mostly childish arguing and of no real interest.Devalues this board .Can we please have worthwhile comments only at this critical time for our investment

The fact that an EGM has not been called as yet can be seen as positive.Conversely if one is called it can only be because there is at best a likelihood that tranche 2 will be further delayed or at worst cancelled by Mercuria.Hopefully not either and certainly not the latter.

Of the HZM projects compared with AMC.See the AMC board for full details ,Once again comments of trusted analyst Redlee are invaluable.

New NOMAD appointed. Same as that of Vast which makes sense.

When diamond news comes through which has to be announced by both companies by RNS,having the same NOMAD to approve the wording etc may be beneficial

TBTT I agree that using the funds for or towards the amount required to arrange the discharge of the existing Charge thereby unlocking T2 is by far the best outcome but if this is the intention why was this not mentioned in the RNS?,If this is the final step required to unlock T2 is it correct to describe it as a Local Administrative Issue?Hopefully AP will provide some clarity and at this point I am hanging on to AP'S statement that he expects to secure T2 within the 30 day period ,To my mind "expect" suggests a chance success well in excess of 50%

As the cause of the T2 delay.Would like to know exactly what they are so as to try to assess as far as possible the likelihood of it going through within 30 days which is the difference between this deal being easy to swallow or nastily dilutive

I am trying to interpret apparent trading patterns and certainly do not have an agenda for negativity.I have made it clear that I sincerely hope we are one of the 4 .In fact events that have occurred since my original post on this subject have made me increasingly optomistic and I refer in particular to the Press release, lack of denial from the minister himself and wording of the RNS.

If they are sales,forward selling becomes a suspect but I would have thought that the only point of forward selling is the ability to buy back by acquiring placement shares at a lower price so as to end up in profit,which can only mean that the placement price is below the current sp