Member Info for Mumbles2021

Good morning Charles, for clarification, you estimate the hit to be approximately $200 million over 8 years that the NPV is calculated over?

DP go crawl back under your rock, you’re getting tiresome. What do you care, you own no PRE shares,

Fregatr, as shareholders, it up to you and me to make sure nothing less than fair value is approved. all has to be put to the vote!

You learn something new every day: whilst we have be complains about pump and dump, the actual term was “short and distort”, who wud uv thunk!

Short and distort[edit]
Main article: Short and distort
A variant of the pump and dump scam, the "short and distort" works in the opposite manner. Instead of first buying the stock, and then artificially raising its price before selling, in a "short and distort" the scammer first short-sells the stock, and then artificially lowers the price, using the same techniques as the pump and dump but using criticism or negative predictions regarding the stock. The scammer then covers their short position when they buy back the stock at a lower price.[28]

if you go to the Share holders page, you will find that the Sovereign wealth fund, owns 23/4 %, PA owns well over 5%. considering that JM Nominees owns 17.1%, Pershing Nominees owns 15.9% and Vidacom nominees owns 12.3%. im not sure how you can make that statement with a straight face. its entirely possible that any number of individual shareholders could have increased their holding dramatically, considering the increase in the shares that these accounts have experienced over the last few months. not withstanding your assertion that they would have to make aTR-1 declaration. As as has been said by more than one person, you are wrong. Perhaps you like to have a look at bullet point two in the exemptions for reporting below.

Exempt Holdings
The following types of holdings are among those that are exempt from the calculation as to whether or not a reporting threshold has been reached or exceeded and may be disregarded:
• Shares acquired for the sole purpose of clearing and settlement within a three-day settlement cycle;
• Shares held by a custodian or nominee in that capacity, provided that the custodian or nominee can only exercise the voting rights attached to such shares under instructions given in writing or by electronic means;
• Shares held by a market maker;
• Shares held by a bank or investment firm within its trading book;
• Shares transferred as collateral, provided that the collateral taker does not declare its intention to exercise, and does not exercise, the voting rights attached to such shares; and
• Shares borrowed under a stock lending agreement.

DP, forget the schadenfreuder, its unbecoming. But i think you might be commenting on the wrong thread. So it might not be schedenfreuder, just general confusion!

That's meant to say two facilities, not faculties

Eloro, this is always going to be two faculties to finance, one for Angola and one for UK. The the Norge's are the loan arrangers. It is entirely possible thank UK funds will participate in the Uk syndication. At the moment we don't know

agreed, another level of tedium though!!

DP, i also very interested in why you are so desperate to nullify, divert away from this particular conversation.

DP you are wrong, that is for US exchanges, but not for foreign exchanges.

Hi Eloro, just to stress, i am also 40% down and admit to having a few concerns. but in respect of UK as opposed to scandinavian financing, i don't see what the issue is. the project is financed and costed in US dollars not in STG. The Norgy's have considerable experience in financing high risk projects, usually to do with oil rigs and shipping. All of which demand high yield bonds to finance them. Angola regardless of the improvements in governance, is still country that demands high returns before financiers will commit their shareholders funds. UK have more than enough projects to finance at low risk, without resorting to high yield bonds.

DP suggest you read up on it again. A foreign shareholder with no representation in the country of listing, doesn't have to declare its holding if held in a nominee account. The rules regarding holding required before being required to make an all out bid don't change. I believe the Nominee company would be obliged in such an instance

Aim for renewable, absolutely correct. Dumbpunter. Believe it or not, you are not the only person who does research.

DP Nominee accounts. / shareholders. Nominee accounts are shareholders with al the voting rights that any other shareholder has, but they have a collective of individual shareholdings under one holding. So they are very much shareholders! The only problem is that the individual holders within a nominee account are not visible. It is this lack of transparency that makes it possible to build up a stake without it being obvious externally. Quite interesting that one of the PRE nominee accounts, also has with it, a company that is 100% owned by the bank that that owns the nominee account.

I hope so, but the biggest problem with common sense, is that isn't very common. It seems to become less common the closer to politicians you get, disappearing completely once they get elected

DP, are you and Theorist in the same office or household. Intriguing and amazing coincidence that posts from you both arrive at 07:23 and 07:24

Good morning Theorist, i actually enjoyed you write up, thank you for once. I’m still mystified with your interest in Pensana, apart from possibly trying to insert some volatility into the share price. Fully agree on the lack of liquidity, the only way that will change is if the SP is high enough to encourage LTH’s to trade them. Current SP only encourages LPH to accumulate stock in a piece meal fashion.

Hogsnipe, interesting article. These articles are being published almost daily now. The chart on the price increases on the various metals is scary

Tony, you are not wrong, and this month is crucial for Pensana management to be seen to be keeping to their timelines. we will see very soon i hope