Member Info for MrJinx

Chisler, I think the universe has twisted itself in knots. Up is down, left is right, night is now day and negative is now positive. Who’da thunk it?????

I would never describe myself as a lazy reader OOSM, but crikey old Riley, I hope you’re more interesting than this in real life. I should feel flattered that you went through the trouble of going through my previous posts, but instead I feel a bit icky. That feeling where you look out of a bedroom window at night and think someone is in the bushes, watching, waiting, lurking….!

A few more daily 8%’ers between now and permit approval would be more than welcome. :)

Again, you’re missing the point. My issue is not with negativity or positivity but posters attempting to shut down debate. Nothing more, nothing less.

@Chisler, that was going to be my first question. :0)
@OOSM, I have positivity. I wouldn’t still be here if I didn’t. However, one thing above all else gets my goat is posters that start slinging rhetoric and silly insults to demean other posters, just because they have a different point of view. Especially if it’s being done by posters who have previously been shown to be wrong. So, my issue wasn’t with the future of EML, my issue was with Westie and others promoting the latest PR interview as if it was a prophecy from God, and then slating people as doom mongers or rumour mongers for raising any questions.
As for me thinking it was me who was being called a doom monger, I can only refer you to my above response. Whether it was aimed to me or not, is largely irrelevant
Overall, I’m quite happy invested here. I’ve had to rein in my expectations due to the reliability of GC and his comments but I’m still comfortable about making money.

Correction;
It makes me an anxious investor and GC, with the ‘read between the lines’ sound bites, he keeps throwing out, has made me like that.

Doom mongers??? Good grief, how much more childish can a supposed adult be?
I’ll bite though as it seems you’ve conveniently forgotten how the delay in the ESIA was kept from shareholders. You’ve also forgotten how the CEO was using terms like ‘imminent’ and ‘no material change’ whilst knowing about the delay. Posters, including myself stated there had to be a reason for the delay but had ‘that email’ shoved in our faces and total denial of any issues from other posters. Who was correct? I take no pleasure in being correct and neither do I take pleasure finding myself now questioning the validity of anything Graham Clarke says in any interviews. That doesn’t make me a ‘doom monger’. It makes me an anxious investor and GC and his ‘read between the lines’ sound bites, he keeps throwing out.

I know mate. I’ve tried on many occasions to have the patience to interpret Audible’s gobbledygook, but it’s impossible. Obviously English is his/her second language which I can kind of understand. However, I think all they’re doing is pumping his thoughts into Google translate and posting it here, thinking it makes sense.

Assuming everything goes smoothly from now, I’m hoping for 12-15p in the short-term (6 months). Based on doubling our share issue through equity raises for capex I’ve previously stated 25-30p at first production. However, if the increase in MoP prices is sustainable, I wouldn’t be surprised at 45-60p longer term. Obviously this only fag packet calcs, dyor, imho blah blah...

@Ideas; Great post. You said what I wanted to say, just less bluntly. I think it’s my matter of fact ness that irks people. :0D

@Onlyoneshareme; it seems you also have the same one eyed view as some of the guys on the Chariot board, including how you view my posts. Nothing in what I write is ever inaccurate. What you and people like you are nervous of, are others highlighting areas where the company have erred. I don’t know why you get vexed, maybe you have an irrational notion that what I write will have a negative impact on the s.p...if only my penmanship was that mighty!
As for conspiracy theories....what? Graham Clarke, whilst knowing the ESIA is delayed, emails Makes on the 18th August and states there’s no reason for the delay. At the same time, he also stated in the public domain that the meeting to award the permit was ‘imminent’. That’s not a conspiracy, that’s a first class ****-up!

Audible, I have no idea what your saying lad. However, at a guess it looks like you’re trying to deny any hiccups existed. Am I right? Where do I collect my prize?

...purely for those that might want to re-write their posting history, there was/is a reason for the ESIA delay. That nobody is concerned that this further work was required, at the same time that Graham was emailing a shareholder that everything was ticketyboo, and that the ESIA was ‘imminent’, is quite perplexing. He’s the CEO of a listed company ffs!!!
Lets hope there’s no delays or issues in the future that they feel they shouldn’t inform shareholders of, until after its ‘sorted’.
Don’t misunderstand me, I’m delighted with the update, but I’m also very disappointed with the disrespect they’ve shown shareholders. That should never happen and erodes trust.

How does that help anyone if one side of the discussion is deleted?
This whole debate is based around EML’s definition of what Is Material Change. As a shareholder, my definition would be an unreasonable delay to possibly the most important piece of the planning jigsaw. Graeme may see things differently but that doesn’t make his definition correct. Neither does it make my definition correct but again, as a shareholder, I expect to be kept updated.
As for calling me a Doom-monger, just grow up.

Thanks for taking the time to reply, even if they were a trifle condescending. My question was why a minister ‘needed’ to be at the meeting, not ‘wanting’ to. Also, my question did note ministerial involvement at signing the deal/permit off.
I’m sure any minister in any democratic government around the world is far too busy for the minutiae of environmental permitting meetings and will be looking at advisors and experts to give him guidance.
However, I take on board that there were also local elections and as such, the make up of the committee members and involved stakeholders may have changed. For me, this is the most likely scenario.

Why would a minister need to be in post for the Environmental permit to be issued. Surely the minister wouldn’t attend something he probably wouldn’t have a full grasp of? He may need to ratify the permit with a signature but I very much doubt he or she would be that hands on.

What can I do Growl. MC was posting absolute ****e about £130m a year revenue from renewable energy and his mates back him up. I question his figures and I get filtered....even by posters I’ve never even heard of. You couldn’t make it up. :oD))

Well, isn’t that funny! This is why listening to people like Marineclarke is dangerous.

MC has gone from this last night “ so 130 million revenue a year to CHAR...”
to this, today “Adding an extra $135 million to char market cap”.

Apart from automatically assuming that asset value equates 1:1 on market cap being a bit naive, as we’ll also be taking on debt, but the $1.8m per Mw figure is for farm downs of a couple of projects in France, a wealthy G7 country. We’re talking about the development of renewable energy in Africa. One can only assume asset value will be less.

So, using figures based on Total Eren turnover 2020 — €450m / 3500Mw of plant = €125k per Mw of plant.

Potential turnover for CHAR
15% x 5(00) = 75Mw of plant. *75Mw x €128.5k = €9.4m
Again, this doesn’t accurately reflect what price per Mw is probable in the African projects region.

SHC. I posted yesterday morning. It wasn’t a negative post but it was jumped on by you as if it was. Then MC got involved for no reason than to just get involved. You and I came to an understanding and it was settled. I even apologised for calling you stupid as it seemed to offend MC’s sensibilities. Then MC jotted a few ‘calculations’ for the renewable generation projects which appeared quite high, so I asked for clarification. Quite politely if I may say so but got grief back. I made a calculation based on Total Eren’s turnover against its power Generation around the world. I feel that’s the best way to calculate at this stage as it would obviously take into account fluctuations in energy usage. It’s better than saying we’ll produce this amount of power 100% of the time and be paid for, 100%. My calculations were half of what MC calculated. Now, do I engage discussion or do I not for fear of being called a troll or slated.
That’s my main issue really. It seems everyone’s point is valid, but only if it’s the same as yours. Which isn’t okay.
I see MC has a fan...musicman99. Why on earth would I be bothered about being filtered by people, and then to boast about filtering when I’ve never heard of them before. Honestly SHC, why do you associate with them...?

As I said earlier, you’re not worth the turd on my boot. I’m only sorry I attempted to engage positively with you. I’ll learn...!