Member Info for Legalwolf

This is very much load up time. I think the next breakout will take us into 18 - 21p range.

Great interview from BG. Nice to have instis and majors circling around OMI so early in the process. As for Pepas, we have to hold onto it for now, given the potential to expand the strike area AND the possibility of finding a deeper source for the mineralisation. But continued drilling success will mean that a major will come in hard for it, especially when you look at Agnico/Collective's recent deal. They will make OMI an offer that is too good to refuse I suspect.

April should be a strong month here. GLA

Depends on whether what Zinger is suggesting is that delays with DFC payments will delay the DFS. That is theoretically possible and indeed likely, and it is down to MR to come out and allay any such concerns. His last interview just sort of added to the uncertainty imho.

This has the feel of a market waiting for the next fund raise, or tranche payments from DFC. It does seem that no RNS is going to lift the share price ahead of such uncertainties.

Why only a portion?

Buyers coming in at these lows and the Ask has gone up. Gearing up for another crack at 5p for next week perhaps?

And remember with GGP - it was one hole that triggered the start of its rise. One hole that stood out. Could hole 7 have the same impact here. The hole that sets this on a whole new trajectory?

Seingred - the main argument for Director buys is that it shows confidence, is putting the money where their mouths are, and is one of the the things that many insti and other investors look for before they commit their own funds. BUT we are attracting strong insti and investor interest here regardless.

I still remember POW - where PJ had £500k of his own money invested in it. What little good did it do? There are plenty of other AIM examples were Director Buys don't mean anything or do anything. It's becoming an overrated tick box.

How many people have exited OMI because of this? Hardly a single one and that will remain the case, because the projects are doing the talking for us. It's the amount of ounces in the ground, not the amount of shares held by BG, that's going to determine this investment for us.

You can see the buys coming back in at these levels. Should set us up nicely for another tick up this pm and into results next week.

Will any of us care if the share price continues to go up? Hell NO!

Then maybe explain how/why it matters and whether/how its holding the company back? If folk come up with specifics around these questions, rather than overly simplistic headline grabbing statements, then we could have a debate. Did I want them to buy - yes of course! Would I want them to buy at the expense of instis - no I don't think so. Do I think it matters - a rise from 2.5p and strong insti interest would suggest not. Does Pepas care? No. Does El Pantano care? No. Will El Cedro care? No.

Https://www.investing.com/news/commodities-news/goldman-sachs-boosts-its-end2025-gold-price-outlook-3950972

IF we do break through 5p, it will lead to a massive move up. I'd say the chances of doing so are actually quite high. We're already at 4p and awaiting the next set of results, which could prove to be the most significant we've had in that they will have expanded the resource. The company are confident having inspected the core and gone straight back in with two Rigs. There will shortly come a time when 5p will act as the new support level, and we will be scrambling for the last of the 4p shares. That's the markets for you.

They key question is - has it put off institutions from buying? The answer is clearly no it hasn't, they have come in en masse regardless of the Director's holdings (or lack of).

I could understand if we weren't getting interest, and we could point the finger at the Directors. But Director buys are overrated, especially on AIM stocks. I'm sure we've all had our experiences where Directors have had large holdings and it hasn't made a difference, and are often seen as gimmicks as well - lipstick on a pig.

I've just added some more in the lower 4s. First attempt at breaking out was inevitably met with waiting sellers. You don't usually break through at the first attempt.

Hoping price is now resetting itself to have another go at that level. So lower 4s looked like a good place to add. But let's see.

Starting to nudge its way towards 3p.

5p represents a significant point on the chart, in that if we break through that, we are then out of this large basing pattern. These large base breakouts often lead to the biggest moves. I would expect pressure to start building within this 4p to 5p mini range, as shares change hands. It could be a significant breakout because lots of sellers have exited already, and buyers will be firmly in control - no question unless the results disappoint, which seems very unlikely given existing results and core inspection.

"We see the prospectivity of scale to the north as a potential game-changer for the Company, and this placing will enable the Company to progress vital exploration, whilst gold continues to pushing past $3,000/oz."

EXACTLY - everyone sees this exciting and emerging opportunity, including institutions from across the globe!

Cheap as chips at 13p, in that any strike around the current PEPAS 1 will have this headed towards previous highs. That would represent a 200-300% rise from current levels, all of which could happen in the next 3-6 months, with all the new institutional buying power that has come in for this very eventuality.

Can't believe folk are thinking of selling. I mean, we are on the verge of making what could be a world class copper discovery and have only scratched its surface so to speak. Off the back of initial results and inspection of core for the forthcoming results, multiple Rigs have been deployed to see exactly how large and deep this discovery is.

Moreover, the share price is on the verge of breaking through the roof and into the open sky.

This is surely the time to add, and this is surely a long term hold, to see how 2025 plays out?

Directors can't and indeed shouldn't take shares ahead of institutional investors. That would be acting in their interests and not the interests of the company. The simple reason for this is that institutions are better able to support the company's share price growth than Directors are. There are various reasons for this, which include:

1) Institutions have much deeper pockets.

2) Institutions can buy at any time, without restrictions. Directors can't.

3) Institutions can and will support future funding needs. Directors can't.

4) Institutions attract others to a share, in a way that Directors don't. The former choose to invest in the company, the latter are expected to regardless of merits.

5) Institutions have a wider network of clients than Directors have friends/family willing to invest.

6) The tweet confirms that the placing went to North American, UK/European, Asian and Australian institutions. Which of these do the Directors say no to so that they can take those shares instead?

With all the newsflow coming up here, Directors won't have much of a window to buy. So would I rather have a Director taking shares and who isn't going to create/influence the same share price growth, at the expense of one or more institutional shareholders that very much would have done, and now will do?

THIS is how I think we need to view and think about this, rather than making it overly simplistic and binary as some are doing. We should welcome the institutions coming onto the book. The Directors can follow at a later date, or take up their options. So it's all good. All imo and dyor