Member Info for Mitch984

Stop the stupid pumping Maverick and Oily. If either of you were long time holders of Zioc you would know that every previous Zioc RNS has only ever had a very limited upward effect on the share price. In fact most have seen the price decline. And that will be the case with this one too.

And anyone who infers that MMs have any effect on AIM shares should not really be investing. Share trading on AIM is purely influenced by actual buys and sells and the overall computer algorithm. MMs have no effect, or indeed any interest at all. They make their money in the main market, not on penny AIM shares.

"On April 8, 2026, Shore Capital Stockbrokers filed Form 8.5, disclosing they surpassed 1% ownership in KP2 relevant securities."

That is not correct I'm afraid. Form 8.5 is a filing obligation for all AIM companies when a company announces a Commencement To Formal Sale Process, which KP2 did on 4/11/2025.

Since then Shore Capital Stockholders have had to file a 8.5 to notify the market of any KP2 share purchases and share sales by any of their clients - and they have filed over 100 of them! Definitely nothing to do with any entity surpassing 1% ownership of anything.

The one you refer to on April 8th 2026 was merely a notification that one of their clients had purchased 257,166 shares and another client had sold 295,000 shares.

"There has been a buyer filling their boots..."

I have seen absolutely no evidence of this for months - since November in fact when Everblue bought 12 million from an existing shareholder.

The lack of share price movement backs this up too. If there was a big buyer accumulating, the share proce would not be stagnant.

"You write : "switching their registered office from the UK to the BVI..." PLs clarify, if ref to ZIOC, haven't they always been BVI...and the Jumelles Mauritius and Seychelles? Or am I misremembering?"

You may well be right on that Extrader . I seem to recall Zanaga having a London registered address at one time but that would not have affected the BVI company aspect. I might have been confusing Zioc with another company that made the full BVI switch. Apologies for that.

Will contact on ADVN as soon as I get time - my travel schedule is hectic to say the least at present.

If Sir Mick really is the driving force behind RAM, AT's involvement needs some serious investigation. How can he have looked after shareholder's best interests when he is a business partner of Sir Mick?

And Feeks. If you really think the Nomads and Zioc have done nothing wrong, how do you explain the lack of TR1s? TR1s are supposed to be filed and the ultimate beneficial owners disclosed when the various entities ended up with shareholdings in excess of 5%. None were filed - and we still do not know who the ultimate beneficial owners of the various entities are.

AT apparently said last week that he needed their permission to disclose their names. Not according to AIM rules - its supposed to be an obligation!

They might have been able to get around this because of switching their registered office from the UK to the BVI. If so, that also stinks - and shows just how long the various entities have been planning this.

Jiving,

Although I am disappointed with the deal, that is mainly because of my age (72). If I was 50 and had my shares stashed away for my retirement, the prospect of a royalty and a decent return on my investment in 15 years would be attractive. Sadly I am not too interested in what return I might get when I am in my late 80s!

However personally I think this from your post is incorrect:-

"Less than 30% of shareholders are in the RAM concert party so the other 70%+ are in play. "

I have no evidence due to the lack of TR1s that should have been filed, but I think RAM & co already control above 51% so there is no way us small shareholders can vote the deal out at the June meeting. I also think the board already know this, which is why they are "defending" the deal by saying we can vote it out in June.

RAM and co control everything, including whether to accept a third party offer. The rest of us are just bystanders that the board occasionally (and very reluctantly) pay lip service to.

Can someone explain to me how CTAI /Alludium can compete with the multi-million dollar companies already doing this, like:-

https://www.servicenow.com

CTAI/Alludium have no financial backing, no expertise, and currently no saleable product.

Roger has warned you many times on here, yet you constantly dismiss him as a deramper. Like me, he goes back 5+ years with CTAI. The directors of CTAI make their money from pumping their own shares and then selling them, just like they did with their Covid and Blockchain apps that they were never able to sell to anyone.

They deliberately target the current buzzword (AI at present), claim they are developing something in that field, display it at industry shows, get accredited by organisations without having a finished product, and then never produce any income. All designed to take money off small investors.

Trade this share by all means - set your 10-20% profit then sell. However do not think if you hold long enough that you will get a 10 bagger. As Roger has told you so many many times, it will sink back to what it was before they came up with AI. Then next year the directors will move on to something related to whatever is the technical buzzword for 2027.

They target areas that they know are very complicated technically and which 95% of small investors do not have the knowledge to understand fully. Ask yourselves whether you fully understand the intricacies of what they claim to be developing and then research the many multi-million dollar companies with thousands of employees who are currently developing the same thing.

Also, if you have time (and you should make time if you have serious money invested here) research the history of CTAI and their directors along with their previous money-making "ventures".

Trade, make your profit, and get out.

To be honest, Zioc have been less than forward about disclosing anything related to AT remuneration, share allocations, or consultancy fee.

For several years AT's remuneration was in shares - which should have been disclosed. It never was, and we still do not know how many shares AT was allocated in lieu of slary.

The issue at the moment to my mind is one of conflict of interest in relation to the shenanigans of the last few month. AT was an integral part from the Zioc side of the deal that screwed us all, yet was also an acknowledged business partner of one of the main "beneficiaries" of the deal. Totally separate from the subsequent consultancy arrangement.

Without knowing his personal shareholding in Zioc, it is very hard to know if he played it all with a "straight bat" as they say.

Talk about a low-key announcement. Nothing on the official Zanaga website and nothing posted on X so far. And its already just three working days before the meeting.

Deliberately designed that way to keep most shareholders in the dark and to avoid awkward questions?

With the underhand way Zanaga has been operated this past 6-9 months, it would not surprise me in the least.

Where on X/Twitter?

https://x.com/Zanaga_Iron_Ore

Feeks.

I partl;y understand your defense of the deal, but I think you must try to understand the difference in ages of many of the long term holders here.

I am 72 - so its a lousy deal for me. A royalty in my 80s is of no use to me at all, even if I am still here!

My view is that its a decent deal for any investor under the age of 55 or so who can put their shares away in the bottom drawer for a decade or more.. Anyone older (or much older in my own case) its a really lousy deal.

I think the most interesting question from the TR1 is why Gupta has reduced his holding by selling 3million shares.

The big thing that has become apparent to me from the supposed "last resort"solution described in the RNS is how totally underwhelming Marty's appointment early last year has been.

First we had the ridiculous and inaccurate interview he did with the media in June 2024 that caused a share price spike and a subsequent RNS "denial" of what he had claimed in the interview.

Then there is all the worldwide travelling he has supposedly done to promote Zanaga to potential investors (and possible buyers), which has resulted in ..... absolutely nothing.

No doubt there will be some benefit for him personally long term from the recent RNS from the shares he has, but as regards what he has achieved for us shareholders, he has been a huge failure.

I agree with MM on this.

The best way forward is for larger private shareholders not part of the "controlling group" to approach the company via AT or Elphick. We need more info and assurances as to why the RNS states that this is a good deal for us.

Any other approach - legal action or regulatory authority complaints - will not succeed anyway. Nothing illegal has happenned, although there have been several instances where AIM regulations have been stretched or even not followed.

The disagreements and differing views on here about what all this means for us private investors is exactly why AT or Marty or the Chairman should be conducting interviews to spell it out clearly.

Do they care about us? They probably don't, but they sure as hell should do if they have any morals.

There are now some short term rampers on here who we had never heard from prior to the RNS.

Take what they say with a pinch of salt. They are most likely looking to make a quick 10-15% and then they will be gone.

MM has never known any more than the rest of us. All his posts were pure speculation based on theories and known facts, just like ours have always been of course.

I'm not criticising him for his speculation. However his occasional claims to have inside knowledge that therefore made his speculation better than ours is a bit hard to take bearing in mind what has happened.

"15p - 22p fair value. Share price should not be here.."

When has the Zioc share price ever reflected "fair value"?

The share price (apart from the recent price fixing pior to the "big reveal") is determined by small investors and daily buys and sells.

Some of those small investors are day traders who are looking for a quick 10% profit. Others are longer term holders who are despairing about whether they will live long enough to see any profit, like me.

We have no institutional investors - and they would be the larger shareholders we need to relect "fair value". Our only big shareholders now are tjhe various individuals, some still unknwn, who have pulled off this scam.

DD. That will depend entirely on whether a sale goes through as per this RNS:-

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/KP2/commencement-of-formal-sale-process-y5ouub18aoqm0fb.html

If there are competing bidders, we might get 4p or more. If there is only one bidder, then it could be less.

If there are no bidders, then KP2 is back to arranging their own financing, as per the RNS announcements prior to the one linked to above.

Its a grab and a total exploitation. Definitely not a cunning plan by the "legends" to attract a competing bid.

This was a set-up from the first day they all came on board to buy out Glencore. On reflection, it was all pretty obvious from the near-shell companies set up to do that deal, and the lack of TR1s to identify beneficial owners. Something that was never enforced by the Nomad, as it should have been.

This was their plan right from day one.