Member Info for NelsontheDog

Dst,

Please let us know the fruits of your research and sources - id be really interested to know your approach to finding this out - I just assumed it was beyond my reach.

So many options for the well investor. It could be an entity, a big entity investing to get an inside track on further Paradox partnership and gaining a first look at data.

The 7.5m was put in pre end of tax year - could be an individual using it to defer a tax call with the hope of returns at a later date rather than gifting tax.

It could be any other of many others as we all are aware.

The bottom line is we need ZPHR to share a route to production at paradox now, and I think the addition of a 3rd party will help in focussing on that element. In the meantime we are in an info void - Its not an ideal situation, but Id rather CH and co do the work properly on a deliverable plan with engaged parties than spin us a typical AIM feed the chickens response - so I will wait and try not to peck the dirt too much in the meantime.

Marine

My concern on the Copper side is this is the second, third if not fourth true up and validation on which we have then acted. 1st true up invest, 2nd true up go to modular strategy and Roan is going to do x tonnes from low grade. 3rd true up - were buying better high grade ore and with that Roan can do a bit less than that promised from the original low grade ore - and we need to leach to get more out ore (as the initial numbers arent coming true).

Each time, on LC's findings we are compelled to act fast - secure resources and move in a direction. I would hope we now go a little slower - really properly kick the tyres on the new strategy versus the old. We can then assess the option to big up one side over the other - we dont have a true up view of copper and yet we are untethering from the shore in the Good Ship Jubilee Way IV.

Of all the errors JLP makes, this act fast, jump now when it isnt necessary is our worst and probably most Share price crushing trait. Oh well, here we go again....

I think Gray1 is in the right today - having expressed initial reactions lets now wait for some actual detail.

Sea change moment here seems to be that Leon hasnt steamed into the interview booth to clarify and explain. I know that he is under the cosh, but this change of approach from one who has seemed the most unwilling to change is to me a significant factor here - or maybe simply timing. To what end I really dont know, but the man who never changes - especially in the face of opinion has changed. Whether by choice or force - again I dont know.

The other point that seems bizarre, is the part about keeping Tjate and going so far as to mention that in the RNS - what on earth is that about? I really dont think anyone thinks this is an asset in any way shape or form - I would love to be proven wrong but sadly I am not that fortunate to date.

I am fine to consider the point that JLP want to focus on copper as the more focussed future as per Jack's and others point.

But the offer appears not slightly low, but way way too low. If we make profits in SA of more than $15m per year (which we do), then we are only really getting the initial payment for the deal - $40m. (the future payments over 3 years are covered by the metals produced - let alone the then ongoing annuity profits) So we are selling an asset with current gp per annum of $40m and huge stockpiled PGM rich tailings for 1x profits - the cash throwoff may be even stronger. Seems way way too cheap - Id rather he raise $40m now than sell on the cheap.

Hi Seis,

Do you have a view from historic and forecasts of the current year expected SA profitability - you are quite honed in and I think that number helps amateurs here, like me, to gain a view of the deal proposed. If you have any view to share I would appreciate it very much - I dont anticipate JLP assistance in this matter.

Hi Seis

I would ideally like a better view of the deal and more crucially the operating profit of SA business to have a look at it.

If deal is $40m upfront followed by $45m and $5m for prices then what discount factor do we use to gain a current value? SA interest rate running at over 7% but there is execution risk to be discounted in a further out payment schedule - ie the enterprise risk of the venture purchasing the assets.

If the operating contrbution to the JLP business of SA is more than $15m per year, then it becomes effectgively only the $40m upfront as consideration. thats why I think this may be a little cheap.

Did Tiger ask you to filter me PanamaBob?

lol

I still think this could be really good for Coin. But, they owe 5 BTC from the raise prior to the one pending. They may have already put this in Forza, following their commitment to do so and simply not updated the market, but it is this void of communication that is completely unnecesary and leads to mistrust if not addressed. You cant be a Bitcoin custodian without the explicit trust of your investors. Coin - address the 5BTC gap - i will be joining the Spaces on Friday if possible to ask this question if it isnt addressed before the Q&A opens.

How do you know Tiger? "This isnt a flip" - you have no idea. You are stating opinions and assumptions as facts. Its tiring (fact!).

Fair play to Slater - he's probably already sold a chunk of shares prior to announcement and as such he is farming his interest in Blu.

Tiger and PanamaBob are a fairly awful ramping team. Tiger knows about the "rumour" of coinbase buying Blu, but is vehement about there not being a raise (when it seemed quite likely to occur). Blatant artists of the bull excrement. I am just venting my spleen here - the ramp gang has been so blatant that this is not news to anyone I assume.

My assumption of Benn joining the Blu board was that it is Fabrizi offering a salary to Benn in order to in some small way shackle him to Blu interests - his duty of care means he now cant blatantly shaft Blu - I do not know how much comfort that gives.

Despite all that - there may still be a kernel of worth in Pendulum and Vortex - time will tell.

I would like to know if this has Slater approval, or, is this Leon attempting to break free of his new masters at Slater via the deal. It would not surprise me at all. Over the past few years, I have zero faith in Leon "loyalty to owners" - his first rule is always to remove challenges to his absolute authority here. Hopefully Slater will comment before any vote.

Heightened interest in Zambia assets may be there - but the money from this proposed deal will not be - we do not know the amount and it is payable over 3 years I believe from the announcement.

I would be willing to consider this proposal, but there needs to be some analysis first - why do this just before year end results I wonder? Is that perhaps because we have made quite good money in the PGM/Chrome business. Counter proposal - release 12 month earnings for this element and then we can consider the deal.

We dont NEED to do this so any urgency attached to this deal is false - usually where urgency applied it is to stop full scrutiny imo.

My initial thought is no!

The offer gives UP TO $90m payable over 3 YEARS!

By compare, what operating profit could we expect over three years from this matured business? I think the actual real consideration is pathetically small.

Need to read further but as ever it seems Leon asks us to back him and his poor performance rather than him rewarding us as investors.

I read the overnight debate with interest and wont give my full view as I presume that is only interesting to me.

Where I would add - micropayments v whales - Vortex is still looking to fulfil the micro payment space and I am very happy about this. The poorest of workers have been grifted by Western Union and others with high fees - I would be proud to see this closed shop busted open via these technologies. If this wasn't a key part of the market plan, why do Vortex have a store in Brazil? In regard to Whales - this is a currency converter within a crypto model and the fees are low - why wouldn't Whales use it also - also in the fullness of time all FX transactions - business entities etc? - if you can get the lowest fee for small transactions its more secure to separate a large transfer - the only reason to not do this is bulk discount on fees - and here we have at present, a universal low fee. In other words, if its good for the smallest, the largest will also use it.

I agree the fees are currently small, but to what value is a technology that is not only built but now but already proving utility in marketplace use? More than the £7m market cap.

Coming back to Western union, they could buy this at a level that wouldnt even need reporting financially and removing a big risk to their existing business model. Therein lies the value - its over and above the current value of future cashflows from Vortex - there is a large large value in the software itself.

GLA

Why cherry pick? The agreement was for up to 10m tonnes. Its delivered by the 40tonne lorry load and processed - thats small increments and as these are processed you simply dont feedback if happy, or, you tell JLP that the load was not satisfactory - JLP will then ensure you get what they want or the client simply stops the agreement. Not everything needs to be via contract - some of it is via good old fashioned communication between parties to reach reasonable outcomes.

Agree - Fre. There is already a funded commitment to purchase another 5 BTC for Forza from previous so I was expecting an RNS to this effect before now - perhaps a mid-day announcement in order? That still leaves more to come via the current round of funding being carried out at present. A little dose of momentum wouldn't go amiss right now.

At a sub £8m market cap - even after this rise. The $1m of volume proves the software works in the real world and the start is always the hardest. There is past experience and presumably a rollo deck of potential clients at Satoshi thanks to its previous DTransfer project so with a foothold, a real life product that works and a team that have to an extent been here before I am keen to have a seat to see what happens in spite of the past misgivings of Blu / Satoshi. Early days but the sun may be shining here. Good luck to the optimists!

Was 24p to buy and 22.5 to sell when I was on the phone just now.

Hi Blanka

Yes - website said phone trade when I looked. I rang and they said to confirm on any call, but that they usually waive the phone fee £49 and only charge the usual charge where it is the website referring you to trade by phone. Only about a minute wait to talk to a human.

The volatility here is high following the rise. Lets focus on the share and what we know rather than massives from understandably excited holders, or seemingly negatives from them aswell. When people attack the posters, its a sure sign that its time to buy or sell.

Good luck to all holders who want a rise

A long long long term holder.