Member Info for Moorscloud

Absolutely RV, this is a brilliant story and happily it has every chance of a very happy ending for all holders - except shorters :) - irrespective of any negative nonsense dribbled on this board. The next chapters continue to be written out of our sight with far bigger players than us and trailers and tasters and drafts will be put out when they are. And thank goodness, if we have the patience and wisdom, we too (having done so little) will also benefit from "generational wealth".

To quote Deltalo - "I like the sound of Dividend returns, and with that much potential revenue it should be a good one." Quite agree - always sad when the only way to benefit from a company's success is to sell the shares. Has there been any confirmation from He1 that paying dividends is a target for the company? If there is a JV, would paying dividends still normally be on the table?

Just in case anyone is not suitably in awe of what Lorna and her team are achieving, a little bit of science on the subject - waaaaay beyond me btw:

"4Helium production within the Earth’s crust is primarily controlled by the radioactive decay of 235/238U isotopes of uranium and 232Th isotope of thorium and their daughter isotopes, via αparticles. The helium concentration in any rock or mineral is dependant primarily on the radioelement concentration and the age of that rock or mineral (Ballentine and Burnard 2002).

The 4He production rate from each radioisotope, R is given by:

4He (atoms g-1 yr-1) = Xr [R] (NA/Ar) × 10-6 (eλt - 1) × yieldr (Equation 1)

Where: Xr = fractional natural abundance of isotope R

NA = Avogadro’s number (6.023 × 1023)

Ar = molar mass of R (g)

λr = decay constant of R (yr-1)

yieldr = number of α particles emitted in the complete decay chain

[R] = the concentration of R in ppm

t = age (yr).

Decay of 238U, 235U and 232Th: λ238 = 1.55 × 10-10, λ235 = 9.85 × 10-10, λ232 = 4.95 × 10-11 (Steiger and Jäger, 1977) yield 8, 7 and 6 α particles respectively. The normalised natural abundance of U gives X238 = 0.9928 and X235 = 0.0072.

Hence, the number of atoms of 4He produced in 1 gram of rock per year becomes:

4He atoms g-1 yr-1 = (3.115 × 106

+ 1.272 × 105

) [U] + 7.710 × 105

[Th] (Equation 2)

This formula allows the maximum volume of 4He generated within the rock units to be

calculated...

Think we should just leave them to it, have faith and patience and be very grateful that "generational wealth for investors" is also on her mind :)

My weekend breakthrough - copy and paste into the filter box :)))

But rather fun watching them squirming around for "risks" nonetheless :)

Hoping someone posted the amount of views by close yesterday and the amount now...

Brilliant thought - would love to think they're onto that already even if the backing would probably be China or Russia not us... :{

As Nvidia become a more valuable company than Google or Amazon as the worlsd gears up for AI, this is worth reading:

Helium Is Instrumental in Semiconductor Manufacturing - IER

The Institute for Energy Research

https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org › fossil-fuels

Because helium is an “inert” gas, it does not react with other elements, which makes it ideal for manufacturing semiconductors....

Keep squirming Herbie - won't filter you, your creative desperation is entertaining :)

Post of the year?

And maybe take the Swerve with you...?

You might as well go back off grid in S America..?

"If I’m wrong i will make a very public and humble apology." I'm sure you could do that that without turning a hair: making a contribution to cancer charities out of your ill-gotten shorting gains as suggested by IslandGirl would be infinitely more appropriate.

So if you thought it would harm Hemo's ability to improve lives, would you or wouldn't you short?

While yes, I can see that rampers damage a board like this and I have to admit to being influenced by them in my early Sirus/Cineworld days (!), the difference between them and derampers is that derampers can be shorters whose way of investing is built on the target of the company's failure. This can damage not just the board and possibly naive investors but the company itself and in some cases (like companies aiming to reduce suffering and save lives) that is far worse than ramping.

Fair point Pumpky, fair response JHFH. No-one has suggested that shorters create the point of weakness, just that they then CHOOSE to make their money by digging into the weak point caring nothing about what that does to confidence in the company and in Hemo's case, its ability to help people. In Hemo's case, Pumpky/IslandGirl, do you approve of this?

Was going to anyway but happy to tell you that IGirl

Once again I'll ask (last time), T'hound, do you think it's okay to short a company whose goals are to prevent suffering and save lives?

Apparently the London Stock Exchange first opened in 1801. I won't detail all the things which happened then which are unbelievable and unacceptable now, but slavery and bear-baiting spring to mind. Just because it still happens does not make it right and people always have the choice how they invest. Pleased it does sound as though you too actually think they could invest in other ways yourself however.

T'hound. Does shorting bet on a company failing? Does it therefore aim for a lower sp? Does this harm confidence is the company? Can you really see "nothing wrong" with harming confidence in a company whose goal is to save lives?