Member Info for NelsontheDog

I think it is a good management strategy to ask us about SA v a copper expansion that is greedy for more cash to grow. I agree with Mikie that it was probably the idea of the FD.

If we vote yes, then SA gone (hopefully with a revised upwards price pre circular) and Leon uses this mandate to continue JLP push into copper.

If no, and given this suggests either a slower expansion or alternative raises of capital - does Leon stay in place for most of you? I would suggest that with his track record of share issuance, he will claim he has no other choice but to dilute heavily (rather than acknowledge we could grow slower) and will readily do so claiming the vote gave him an unwritten mandate.

I strongly believe Leon needs his card marked at a minimum in the event that SA isnt sold - personally I would like him gone. He is undoubtedly a leader, but he doesnt acknowledge his fails and this is dragging on his ability to actually communicate as we saw in the last garbled operational update. Put simply, too many u turns, and the chemist genius label is jaded after Roan for me - and Im sure we have good sub laeaders there anyhow.

Personally, given our haphazard trial and error (and opportunistic) approach to growth in Zambia so far, I would prefer we go slower so as to reduce the sunk cost impact of when we have to do a turnaround. To be clear, I am not critical of the rush in strategy itself, just if thats the model, go slower - our ROCE will thank us.

To holders for this latest drop - I decided on little top up at 11.9p literally moments before we started this further drop. So you are aware, I am not currently planning another buy so we should hopefully rise with Mark's PR tour of HNWI.

Drifting up and with a call later - not sure it will retrace to let anyone selling back in today - feels untethered

Shuvlin

Track record is 100% a reason. Yes in SA we got where we wanted to be - I recall in budget and on time with porduction levels ending higher than forecast for the most part. Yay SA.

Zambia and Copper - how can you seriously say track record is not something to be cautious of? Moving timeframes, moving production outcomes and after more than double the time promised BY THE SAME LEADER, we have less than halve the output originally conceived.

TRACK RECORD.

I am not averse to considering the proposed change but lets not pretend we are on a sure thing here - this is not a proven high performing management team here offering to let us hitch our wagons to their route - at best they are still in apprentice mode, at worst they are not capable of doing what they say they are going to do - based on track record. Thats not my opinion - thats borne out in their performance against their own declared targets - Track record.

Sorry for the over-emphasis but to dismiss past performance outcomes appears unwise.

Sadly just referring to temperatures you saucy lot. Just a bit bored and thought I might elicit a laugh or two from the board on an otherwise slow day.

I am a little vexed by no news but hey ho - worst thing is I have no lemons.

Being called into action here this morning. Probably jitters, but I openly admit I expected quicker news on 36-2 route to production given the dead time prior to drill and the fair certainty that there would be a mix of gas and oil in the drill result.

Still, its likely to be a wonderful day and I shall make some lemonade and invite round some equally hot neighbours for a refreshing length of refreshment.

GLA

Track record.

Seis, there isn't a poster here at present who isnt speculating. Even those who think they arent seem to have a view - as it should be btw.

Mikie, I can make your speculation fit in my mind in a way that does give comfort as a potential reasoning.

The reason I query the copper strategy is for me it seems JLP behave a little like a Fox in the Chicken coup - they are at everything when we only need a few chickens to form our first supper. I get the need and indeed advantage of being nimble in changing approach as we go, but I do think we need some rear view mirrors - going way way too fast imo - or rather not being disciplined on ROCE metric. Seis and Kalan as the numbers guru's you may have a number on this but how much of the invested money is in a) actively producing activity (and how much of this is PGM), b) in elements still to prove themselves and more worryingly c) in areas that turned out to not be core within 2 years of their investment -eg low grade Copper. On that scorecard JLP is certainly not deserving of any swagger and as the chief moneyman in my Family Office (lol) I need to as ever consider if they are worthy of more of my cash moving from a to b and c. Its as sure an investment decision as deciding to sell to buy another share.

Well, lets hope he's not on a train bound for nowhere....

Again, I would urge shareholders and wish the BoD to not make decisions at haste. JLP are not sitting on a burning platform - we have a cash positive SA business - we need to kick the tyres carefully to ensure we understand the offer and if it is fair value.

Equally I would like to see a little more proof of success in Copper before I throw more at it. JLP saying tests are good - seriously we have been here before. Lets ascertain Zambia progress fully, refine strategy and then invest - we keep jumping ahead and it really hurts in the long run.

I mention burning platform above in regard to JLP who I cant see face one, but perhaps Leon does. Are we really going to let Leon urgency to save face and remain in dominant control dictate the pace at which we review OUR business and assess next steps.

Copper opportunities will still be there aplenty in Zambia in a years time and maybe we will control our focus - we hear at Munkoyu we need specialist miner partners - perhaps this strategy is not quite as envisaged.

Plan, Act, Reflect, Refine, Repeat. Can any positive posters seriously say we are doing this in Zambia and if we arent, whose fault is that?

Apologies for my poor spelling - Licence (writing it out 20 times now on the chalkboard

There is logic in asking why re-liscence to a one failed, cash-strap minnow. However, in the wider context - the governments of these countries are usually wary of being viewed in some way shape or form as trustworthy long term business partners and as such I believe they do not want to rock the boat - and for what? If they do not give Chariot the licence - risk of spooking the horses, not just in oil but credit ratings and view of business conditions generally. Do give liscence - if Cahriot still operates poorly the liscence will make its way into better hands and who cares which market person grifts a profit on the way as long as the development occurs.

Polkadot dipped over the wekend to under $4 - it gets a nose bleed nowadays if it even gets close to breaching $5. Hence share which marginally rose, marginally declines. We are still in bear level prices for mid size established Alts - which is 80% or more of our portfolio. Normally a rally by now but that was when Bitcoin was retail driven and this time its not. So (imo) when a current driver of BTC sells - they have their money in their Share rolls and arent sitting on Binance/Coinbase and Kraken - as such high on their gains they dont push out the risk curve putting profits in alts - their broker probably offers them a tech stock or such. Until retail jump on board we probably wont have much of a rise - again, just my opinion.

ii when it say phone order only - waive the additional telephone fee - £50. as interest in blu rises, they will get their own admin team of their ****s as it will take up more and more time for the telephone team - ideally they would do this as its good practice but that hasnt happenned. so keep buying, selling, trading and they will soon get upset themselves and fix this.

Hi Jarv

"They’re not just holding BTC and hoping its going to go up in value! They’re actively growing their stash with smart automated strategies." - this was my working assumption also having been invested here for a good while - but it is actually NOT the case.

On the spaces call on Friday I joined specifically to see if there would be clarity or information on Otomato performance. They didnt mention so I asked a qustion on this matter of Otomato deployment and performance to date. Eddie answered saying they have never actually gone beyond modelling performance on Otomato - it never went live and as such there is not at this time an intent to do this (ahead of the revised Bitcoin strategy they are publishing). Malcolm went on to say that Forza at this stage will be Bitcoin treasury only (expanding to say he believes treasuries can only be in Bitcoin as it is the only Crypto which can be considered a money equivalent).

Its surprising they havent RNS'd to state the change in model or the non-roll out of Otomato, but presumably that will come this week or soon after when they publish the new Forza strategy once it clears the lawyers.

In summary from the Spaces call - BTC treasury only in Forza right now - Otomato not active or envisaged within Forza at this time of BTC treasury expansion.

I love that first paragraph Tiger. Facts, trend lines and a Reddit discussion forum.

When you next produce your be of your long posts which are bulleted points could you indicate which are which.

For example, your oft cited rumour that Coinbase is going to buy them - I guess Reddit? - lol.

thank you gotreal for the simple *** packet valuation. however, we also have two more points. 1. we need to deduce the current value of the future cashflows in the up to $90m offer - this in effect reduces the consideration value. 2. we must also consider the waste assets we have stock piled. this does have a value independently of the plant - as borne out by the commercial agreement to process it at 3rd party facitlites - how much of the consideration would it take to buy this asset in the open market.

some one needs to sell this deal to us and the reluctance of leon to do so may imply this isnt necessarily his strategy. im not a fan of his continued running of jlp but for sure he has never been shy in talking up his own strategy in the past. in fact the whole asset level strategy is much more mindful of a money manager / finance approach than one from an operational perspective. this may be slater's move not leons - we dont know the timescales and risk levels slater wants in consideration of his other investments.

i must stop speculating - we know nothing other than it was ran up the flag pole and the salutes have not been univeral.

On the Spaces call on twitter. Malcolm and Eddie confirmed that Treasury only relates to Bitcoin and that the Otomato strategy has never gone past testing. So Forza is only Bitcoin at present - good news from a clarity perspective.

Still here, still waiting. I do wonder at so far how this cycle is different from prior ones in that it ist yet retail driving the price of BTC and as such, isnt cash from BTC flowing to the alts. As such im not sure the old model will apply here at all but I am hopefuly that at some stage things come good - not as exciting though.

By the by, that oft used quote buy when others are fearful is dreadful dreadful advice. Buy when others are over reacting / panicking - the fear stimulus can be valid and ignoring it could see your buys p****d up the wall.

I hope we are all on here buzzing soon - the noises for Eth are there in the twitter missives so maybe a strong rerate their could reignite an ALT rally.

So we divest of our S A assets under this deal. Can anyone advise if Leon is one of them? If so I will factor that into the deal when the circular comes.

Prior to the release of the circular and the information we crave - this isnt a decision that needs to be made in haste - we have a profitable SA asset base and we have plenty of projects approaching the capital light phase in Zambia - we dont NEED to make this call. I would therefore expect Leon and co to tell me what the benefit of the sale is to Zambia OVER AND ABOVE what he has ALREADY PROMISED to deliver there. Dont sell the benefit of it being the benefit we were already sold a few years ago and have paid for up till now. I say this as I am confident this wont be the circular approach - Ive been on the revolving updates communication trail for too many years now to expect any different.

My mum in her eighties still lives independently but is becoming more vulnerable with time. Whn protecting her from scam artists we always tell her that anyone putting her on the spot or trying to use a sense of urgency should be disregarded - same applies here I think.