Member Info for news

I just checked.

Theeeeduke: The point is you have NOT DENIED what Helpful said that you made good money from RRR when AB was a star but YOU BOUGHT BACK in etc? If that is the case, that your MBO is not one of impartiality as norm but rather may appear to fit into the HEDGE FUND's text of 1 way neg on 1 stock? That is theory as it is NOT BALANCED with ASSET evaluation etc. IF, you had an OPEN mind, you would ask Helpful nicely, about his post and where that figure came from or his cals as norm. You stated you are posting to counter Helpful but that is not strictly correct either, as I was at the backend as well until I brought a status of sense and good conduct. Imagine, after life is over and one cant let RRR go, then , would not it become something one takes into the next life? So much is currently happening and one counts one's blessings that one can still enjoy the sunshine etc? That is why I wanted to stop posting on this forum due to it becoming a way of life of its us vs them, the shareholders who have any positivity --otherwise why hold.? It becomes tiresome, dont you think to concentrate on only 1 aspect. I talk about after life because many NDE say that moaning is a common feature? But one can chose not to think so but it does not change the fact, that it can become a feature of one's life at RRR if posting starts from 4am +.? Would it be considered in any way positive for one's life? I dont know but I dont think so, hence I wanted to NOT post as its getting only 1 sided.?

Error: Should read, since both of you are NOT SHAREHOLDERS of RRR.. Why spend time posting ?

Theeeeduke: That is much better: "From theeeeduke: .. apparently the co can take out a loan below a certain threshold and not have to disclose it." Duke added: " but know RRR have previously had nasty surprise when they see these loans etc in the FINAL accounts."

My boss would ask me: Have you found out how much THIS THRESHOLD is? It would appear that IF it does NOT have to be disclosed, then the nature of the loan is not what is termed: "SIGNIFICANT" or significant enough to be reported. Yes or No? As for finding out in the accounts [final], why should that come as a "nasty surprise"? Again, not making sense as not having to disclose means it is not of a "DISCLOSABLE" amount? In the commercial world, NO ONE lends without some form of evidence. I said that even the rich classes cant get loans these days and the rise and boom of upmarket pawn brokers in London. It was the news and these look like banks. These upmarket pawn brokers are only by invitation and they take expensive Banksy or Rolex watches from £350k upwards. These loans [or bridging loans] are said to be for school fees etc which is presumed to be private school fees. Let's be more upfront --another poster and your goodself take turns at this same finance angle. Too much concentration and NOT enough of balance. Given BOTH of you are SHAREHOLDERS, then spending time day after day without adequate sleep [posting at 4am+ etc] must have some MBO ie Management by Objective surely? It cant be to SAVE US because one is aware that for ANY STOCK, even an FT stock, it is present as a factor in any analysis, more so on AIM, a more common feature. The London Stock Exchange explains what AIM is about: YOU, FOLKS ARE FUNDING GROWTH CO'S and shareholders are usually HNW akin to angel investors. IF one's analysis says, I think I want to move on, the BUTTON is there to chose to sell , surely or hold? Rather simple?

P.S. As I stated that IF I went to the boss stating that it was "NOT" disclosed to the market per what you said, theeeeduke, I think I would be packing my tea mug knowing full well, that I would be out of a job. In the commercial world, they deal with facts and checking. Even checking 1 source is not enough. Hence, why I said, at best, "wild speculation" and one cant professionally deal with a stock WITHOUT knowing surely. ?

Theeeeduke: Ah, you have NOT commented on your earlier statement: Fact, no news. It should perhaps be, WAITING FOR NEWS surely. No AIM co can, NOT have an update on news given Stockbox interview from Kenya stated: next business is DRC award? Coming back to the financing you brought up, it would be considered, at best, wild speculation with regard to your statement: "UNLESS THEY RAISED MONEY AND NOT DISCLOSED TO THE MARKET." Since you have specifically addressed this to me, I will have to reply so please bear this in mind. IF, money has been raised , say by way of a placing,OFFICIALLY , then surely, by extension, there would be WILD GYRATIONS in the share price as norm with investors working their usual emotions? An RNS is a requirement if this is the case. But theory teaches us, IF funding is for a project that may increase value, then, it could be a positive outcome as norm. But, NOT DISCLOSED TO MARKET does appear to me, to be bordering on...I leave it blank. Companies House per my last check a few days ago HAS NO CHARGES, given ALL 15 discharged and duly filed. I have to ask the FINAL QUESTION: How does this affect any shareholder of RRR? Surely, one has to access one's investment in RRR on a rolling basis and come to a proper and professional ANALYSIS of this co, and as close to the standard of a broker note, even. IF, one own professional broker note spell buy, sell or hold, any funding going forward is not something unknown in AIM co's surely? Funding is generally a hot topic for spectators and one could say, they have no holding in any co, so, to pass time, they find funding an easy topic to post.? I dont know but the MKT IS NOT SAYING either way, and it is "MARKING TIME". Dare the MM's MARK RRR down with the ASSET [or assets] it has currently with JORC and I note that the MIKEI GOLD ASSET is now on the landing page with a video, so classed as asset with some 1.2moz gold? I hope that clarifies. For BALANCE, one should , like all broker notes, highlight assets, strategic review and potential assets. Yes, No? Tues, 26.3.24. As I stated, this endless debate has been going on SINCE BEFORE the RRR AGM of 16.3.24 but STILL NO ISSUANCE TODATE AND THIS IS FACT & EVIDENCED.

Theeeeduke:

Verbatim highlights from theeeeduke: "..fact the co surely has to be running low on cash" & "fact , no news." I was keeping quiet until HAWAIIFIVE0 asked where I was despite my saying that convo's are only of 1 type of the majority vs shareholders in the minority here. So, I would like to respectfully comment as it is of significance: BOTH STATEMENTS FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE C O N F L I C T. How? IF, "fact" of NO NEWS [equates to 0 DRC progress by implication or by conclusion as one earlier stated on this forum] , then CASH refilling of Treasury follows as norm. So, therefore, it is NOT FACT. Substantive FACT is that there has been NO FINANCING POST RRR AGM, 16.2.24 WITH RESOLUTION 4 PASSED IE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE but NO ISSUANCE to-date, Tues, 26 Mar 2024. Ah, herein, what I have stated is FACT AND EVIDENCED. I hope you dont mind, given if I were to have gone to the boss and told him the above, I dont think I would last long in a job. So, I have correctly apportion FACT proven & evidenced vs fact that is not proven or not yet proven?

Tues, 26 Mar 2024. @11:06am. The share price still HAS NOT CHANGED - it is the same to buy and to sell but I have not yet checked this morning but did so yesterday.

With regard to the conversation in this thread - One will note that UPON the SUCCESS of the Itumbula well drilled at Rukwa, Tanzania together with a Liberum broker note on the success of ALL 3 wells-Minchin is now potentially going to head a new lithium co IPO. All appears to be predicated upon SUCCESS and this correlates with the corporate rules of engagement.

In respect of Lorna Blaisse, she is getting on with the job as outlined in the RNS's. She does not tend to talk in the way folks want her to. Besides, there is nothing to talk about currently - technical work must continue for EVALUATION b e f o r e EWT as norm. Few co's get a BROKER NOTE out as it is very costly - from what I understand, they can start from £40k and hence the rules apply. Sam Wahab, the Analyst has very senior experience ie he was Head of SP Angel, Oil & Gas etc per Linkedin before coming to Liberum. From the broker note from LIBERUM, I posted some headline figures and the low capex remains the SAME as quoted by MINCHIN @£50m. BUT THE EBITDA Revenue has gone up as I recall Minchin stating some £80m+ but per Liberum it is around £105m [please check as I dont have my notes with me at the momo.]. One CEO stated that it is their job to run the co but the SHARE PRICE IS DICTATED by folks who buy and sell. At the Liberum interview with Lorna, she was asked what is her comment if HE1 goes to production. In another interview, Proactive asked Lorna why she is joining HE1 and she said , for the TIER 1 POTENTIAL. So, it is CAREER making for Lorna to start as Geo and end as CEO and that will be PREDICATED by the SUCCESS of brining this co to PRODUCTION potentially. If successful, Lorna would have finished her job as CEO during that critical period and to have spearheaded opening a NEW BASIN for green helium. Unfortunately, it is well known that where pi's buy stocks, they are "emotional" investors & this tends to cause gyrations in the price? All well known. But as with many co's, esp oil and gas, shares do tend to be in the range of the spread and "marks time" [trade within the range] until further CATALYSTS as norm. Tues, 26.3.24 DYOR, NIA.

It is now 12 days in the DRC starting from 14.3.24 for "Meeting" & "Meetings." A simple RRR RNS will do, as in: RRR is pleased to inform that pursuant to the "DRAFT AWARD", the agreements have been SIGNED and duly FILED to the DRC Commercial Court and a HEARING applied for by Counsel. It would be a great help to all of us here on this forum who are waiting patiently and brings some reality to those who are not holders relating to 101 procedures. In appreciation for your kind consideration. Mon, 25.3.24.

Can you please provide DATE, citations and verbatim?

From the tweet today from Mr Bell, Chairman of RRR in relation to the DRC A W A R D arbitration, one knows it is LIVE. I saw this said tweet, 2 secs after Mr Bell tweeted. Mr Bell landed in DRC on THUR, 14 MAR 2024 wherein he tweeted: "MEETING" & "MEETING TO MEETING" with pics.

MON, 25 JAN 2024:

9 working days has passed. Therefore, the "DRAFT AWARD" given to RRR and the other party [JV partner] has been circulated some time and BOTH have "AGREED". So, the issue was the delay by the JV partner's counsel who was afraid he was not going to be paid by the JV partner. IF, that has been resolved, then THE "AGREEMENT" would have been "SIGNED" and the counsel would have to "legally FILE" this at the DRC Commercial Court and await a short hearing. If approved, GIVEN THIS IS NOT A LEGALLY DISPUTED or contested award, the Judge will sign and approve. Then , it goes for stamping to make this legal document legally valid.

QUESTION: [1] IS THE AGREEMENT SIGNED BY BOTH RRR & THE JV PARTNER? [2] HAS THIS SIGNED AGREEMENT BEEN -------NOW LEGALLY FILED-----AT THE DRC COMMERCIAL COURT. A court date will be then applied for as above.

CONCLUSION: There is no half way answer. IT IS---- YES,----- AGREEMENT SIGNED BY THE JV PARTNER [RRR would sign anyway as this is the whole point of going to DRC etc] OR -------------NO---------, NOT SIGNED BY THE JV PARTNER.

There is no half way answer: IT IS -----------YES--------SIGNED AGREEMENT [2] NOW ------LEGALLY FILED --AT DRC COURT or NO-----NOT FILED. If filed, then, the worst is over as it resolves the counsel issue as above. The rest will be procedural court methodology as norm.

One knows that Mr Bell may still be in the DRC as there is no pic of Mr Bell arriving in Heathrow or Brussels from DRC.

So, ladies and gentlemen, if BOTH ARE DEFINITIVELY YES & AFFIRMATIVE, then, one may be in a better position than before ? Isnt this Law 101 or PROBATE between 2 siblings relating to a inheritance of a house and ORDER FOR SALE if BOTH agree to sell? Once the agreement is signed, notarized, the counsel for the Executor will FILE it in Court and obtain a date of a short hearing , then sale can take place 101?

Once there is AN AWARD FROM THE DRC COMMERCIAL COURT, that in theory becomes RNS'able? As for learning, I tried to locate the DRC JV video where Mr Bell was interviewed. The video could NOT be accessed as it had gone "private" due probably to the time factor as Proactive phases it out. So, isnt that something to learn that I can RECALL the DRC MUSONI ASSET INTERVIEW BY MR BELL as to the original info/data of Musoni which is of use as it is a large asset? Just winning the DRC AWARD will be A DEFINITIVE, irrespective of the payment event. In my view, these are 2 separate legal events? Yes? No? Same for AVZ and the basic question always asked. Hope that clarifies.

Https://twitter.com/ABell2019/status/1772277745420005792 2 sec ago, Mon 25.3.24 @3:10.

Question from RRR shareholder to Mr Bell: "Still no update? Is there an issue or sorting out details?" 4 hrs ago today. Reply: Andrew Bell, Chairman of RRR: "WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO SAY? YES?."

LoL. At least a response. Thanks Helpful for link to retrieve old videos - learning something new everyday.

Thanks so much. Listening now. Very enjoyable. I searched even the interviewer's Twitter link but it was stated :Pte.

Mr Andrew Bell, Chairman, RRR: "WOULD STAKE MY LIFE ON IT." Andrew of Proactive asked Mr Bell if the JV asset was....

VERY EVIDENTIAL NOW with the DRC award litigation pending. Why? Indeed, an asset that was sold on by the state miner and now subject to litigation. Recommend.

Helpful

Excellent. Highly recommended - 5 stars/5. I have tracked down ALL the RRR RNS/s of the time of the MUSONI JV. In fact, Proactive has disabled the old video interviews on this. Whilst folks moan over RRR's Mkt Cap of £2.38m WITH ASSETS vs AVZ WITHOUT any other asset which they are litigating about, the LAST MKT CAP WAS A$2.75 BILLION @A78c.!!!! Link to Hotcopper AVZ: https://hotcopper.com.au/asx/avz/ [It is still active with update]. Mind you, AVZ does not own 100% of Manolo lithium, DRC either. Manolo PFS stated to be $1bn+. DYOR.

Flightman

There is NO RNS that states placing at "circa 0.4/0.5". From what I understand, RRR RNS, 16.2.24: AGM: "AUTHORITY TO ISSUE 1.5bn"[Resolution passed] has NOT BEEEN ISSUED to date. From recall, I think it was 0.6p+ [PLUS] but NEVER 0.4/0.5p so can you show EVIDENCE/PROOF please? Mon, 25.3.24.

In simple language, in case our chief resident, Banburyboy may not quite catch the litigation and what it is all about , even after all the RRR RNS.

Without RRR's knowledge, their JV partner in DRC -------SOLD-----Musoni to the state miner for some US$15m. This is subject currently to DRC litigation. It has ENTERED the FINAL ROUND given RRR RNS stated: "AWARD DRAFT" given to all parties and "ALL PARTIES AGREE."

2ND PART:

DRC STATE CO THEN SOLD ON RRR/VUP'S MUSONI TO A MAJOR, said to be US$430M [see RRR broker report which I have already quoted.] -----------THIS LITIGATION CANNOT BE HELD IN THE DRC IE LOCAL COURTS and usually goes to INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL. These are international courts to hear business , licence disputes etc. I recall AVZ's international tribunal case was held in Washington DC. ------INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL LITIGATION IS FOR THE ----------------LOSS OF THE ASSET IE MUSONI------------SOLD ON--------AS ABOVE.

BOTH LITIGATIONS ARE -----------NOT SIMILAR-----------NOR DO THEY HAVE TO BE TAKEN ONLY AFTER WINNING THE DRC LITIGATION but helps with money ie some money to put a deposit down etc. Mr Bell explained before but obviously NON -HOLDERS DONT LISTEN TO RRR INTERVIEW, BROKER REPORTS etc or DONT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN the above? As I said, Mr Bell HAS TO CLARIFY AND NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT ---ALL HOLDERS OF RRR WANT TO KNOW and it is their right to know. Mon, 25.3.24. [EVERYTHING IS IN THE RRR RNS, BROKER REPORT & INTERVIEWS] FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT.

For CLARITY:

There is a difference between INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION and DRC Commercial litigation. In the former, it is held at international legal centres. Helpful said that for RRR, under the Treaty of Rome, it has to be held in LONDON or Switzerland. RRR has NOT yet filed for international arbitration like AVZ for the Manono lithium project in the DRC. BUT, should AVZ WIN the FINAL ROUND [both sides to present their legal arguments], then the legal pendulum swings in favour of AVZ. HOTCOPPER AVZ: AVZ is not currently trading due to the fact that the co has NO OTHER ASSETS. But clearly the shareholders ie AUSSIES understand the mechanics of the legal case and NO ONE is posting in the same style as here. Everyone is waiting. DRC - they already will be aware of the FINAL ROUND of AVZ's international litigation and therefore, RRR may follow suit IF Mr Bell consults further. AVZ was financed by Locke , a co to the tune of $20m for the litigation. To Theeeeduke question: You can go to Hotcopper AVZ to see that the FINAL round as above has NOT taken place yet - only an interim ruling. PRECEDENT CASE LAW: It just shows that cases can be WON in the DRC but each on its OWN LEGAL MERITS. SHAREHOLDERS OF RRR: To the comment about: "Talking about $400m BEFORE you have got $7m is....[cannot be repeated] ----------THE LITIGATION in the DRC by RRR is to obtain $10m TO BE paid BY THE STATE MINER to the JV partner /RRR for Musoni [of which this is NOT a FRESH case but many already won etc]. =========BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DRC LOCAL COMMERCIAL COURT LITIGATION VS INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION : That Mr Bell, Chairman of RRR will have to CLARIFY to shareholders. At International Arbitration, it is ABOUT LEGAL LOSS OF THE ASSET IE MUSONI, the 2nd part. OBVIOUSLY, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION vs DRC Commercial Court litigation is NOT UNDERSTOOD by Banburyboy and his remarks is totally out of order in name calling given he is NOT EVEN A SHAREHOLDER OF RRR or if he has decided to buy, then a London lunch's worth. ALL SHAREHODLERS WANT TO KNOW ABOUT INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION and THAT IS THE RIGHT OF SHAREHOLDERS in any update to come. DYOR. NIA. Mon 25 Mar 2024. Not editing.

Pg 8/31: --"-LIBERIUM: HELIUM ONE, ANNUAL REVENUE US$105M. ["could generate]. --- EBITDA US$94M. --- 89% EBITDA MARGIN. -----US$55M FREE CASH FLOW per annum per train. LOW CAPEX: $50M." -15.3.24.

With thanks to Pub Crawl for the link at https://total-market-solutions/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/24-03-15-Liberum-150324.pdf

Those nuanced in Oil & Gas plays will know that there are many factors to gauge ie technicals, one of which will be porosity etc etc. There is a reason why Sam Wahab of LIBERUM mentioned at HE1, helium of 4.7% floated to surface and many seasoned investors also know what it means 101. Same with the mention of all HE1 3 wells floated helium vs 40 wells in the North Sea to prove commerciality. Kindly check as I dont have the original post with me at this moment. Sun, 24 Mar 2024.