Member Info for NikeAir180

You're literally talking tosh at the start of 15:38, Banbury.

Re. 13:12: Have been reading through statements and looking at apspects of the annual reports 2020-22.

Theeeduke you are right in that RRR sold the shares they had in Juno Minerals Ltd; and this was mentioned in the chairman's statement for the 2022 annual report, sale of POW shares was also mentioned and I think the remaining shares in Jupiter Metals was also mentioned regarding sale - the selling of all those assets is covered by the reporting period of latter half of 2021, first half of 2022 relevant to 2022 annual report.

I've said elsewhere RRR finished 2021 in profit because of the Jupiter Mines sale - that is how I remember an online research facility I previously read, I was always regarding that calendar year sense and not the reporting period which is for the first six months of the year and the latter half of the previous year. RRR did finish 2020 significantly in profit: that was in relation to Jupiter Mines and Juno Minerals spin out from that, if I understood / recall correctly - notably in tbe chairman's statement - that profit relating to that event was a foreshaowing of 2021 - relevant to the planned event.

2021 annual report relevant to end of June for that year referred to loss compared to profit listed the previous year, though it looked to me like the income figure for that period was higher than the loss - I wondered as of today, if that was in some way related to Jupiter Mines... Juno Minerals.

Officicially, according to the annual reports, the last year RRR was profitable was 2020 - which was with the

background of the covid pandemic, that profitability did relate to something that was going to and did happen in 2021.

Clarifying 12:22: The retained investment via shares seems to be in Juno Minerals Ltd, the potential royaly is to do with Mt. Ida rather than Mt. Mason, it is a future potential royalty relevant to if the Mt. Ida asset one day becomes active and is not a current asset - acknowledging 11:00 and correcting part of 10:22. All of this post is with regard to the RRR rns of 14/05/21 so any use of present tense and "retained" is with reference to that day.

I am hopeful that the above details are still relevant to RRR today, it seems possibe to me that that non-current asset, is not detailed via projects on the RRR website, simply because it is non-current.

... as a potential positive re. royalty - Mt. Ida.

Correcting part of 10:22 and acknowledging 11:00: Yep, correct Robins, the RRR royalyt in connection tMt. Ida, think the whole interest is?

Took me ages to find the RNS today, only saw the Mt. Mason mountain as it were, when looking at the RNS from the RRR website commpared to internet search engine.

Will be some time before that royalt is ever active - non-current asset, presuming details relevant to RRR from that RNS are still relevant, I still regard it

Re. 02:02: Theeeduke, as of the RNS 14/05/2021 - as I interpreted it: RRR retained an investment in their iron ore asset which was a spin out from Jupiter Metals Ltd in to Juno Minerals Ltd - the RNS detailed a holding of shares as well as a royalty with regard to the Mt. Mason asset, relevant to Juno Minerals and retained RRR investment on the day of that RNS.

Re. 09:00: Banbury with regard to your third sentence in relation to the Faso gold asset, repeating something you don't know doesn't mean you know it.

Your ignorong RRR's investment in Juno Minerals Theeduke, I think from what I remember of a Proactivie interview with Bell, he wanted to maintain an investment of RRR's in that asset and when it was no longer going to be part of Jupiter Mines' assets, that was some of the rationale for the RRR exit from Jupiter Mines.

RRR finished 2021, possibly because of that sale, in profit during the Covid pandemic - that deserves respect. I appreciate the previous investment in Jupiter Mines but I respect the investment in Juno Minerals.

Replying to Babury's post of 16:54 on 22/11/24:

You missed out "currently" when you were quoting RRR rns 06/01/23 with reference to "wholly owned" Faso Minerals subsidiary.

There was a later RNS (not much later that year) where there was a boxed section - left hand side: Faso Minerals subsidiary (not detailed as wholly owned).

On the 11 and 14th December 2023 (if I remember correctly) there were RRR rns' referring to issue of shares which were partly relevant to gold asset.

Regarding Faso Minerals and Helpful, it was in 2024 that he mentioned he was invested in that asset.

Re. 18:29: Was a thought experiment... as you know Banbury, not a prediction.

Responding to Aimdogs post of 18:11:

He didn't say that was going to happen, you can't read his mind, you asked him a question abount funding of this company, he refused to answer that question.

Have you enjoyed trolling yesterday and today Banbury? - not the only days.

2 × 1 reconmendation at the time of your post Banbury. 1 was from me, possibly the other was from you.

Correcting start of final paragrah from 20:57 and acknowledging 22:19...

Yep, Zumore you are correct in that the the twitter post / photos was posted on 22nd which was friday I had made a mistake counting back 23rd to friday but 23rd was saturday so the reply I was thinking of was the next day, you then developed your critique on 24/11/24.

I realised my error as I was walking this evening at 21:25 but couldn't correct as didn't have my phone.

So yep, you might have missed that reply when you subsequently reposted and I had missed it because it wasn't there on 22nd, only noticing it much earlier this evening.

I differ from you in that I genuinely think that is a young person in sitting down with the rock and the pickaxe, not necessarily the same as the young person walking behind the man and slightly lower down the slope. Initially on the friday I thought it was all one photo but clearly two different photos side by side and initially I genuinely and still do think it is a young person of sufficient age sat, holding the rock, it took me more than one check on friday afternoon to see that there were more people in the other photo and there was a wide age range.

I think Bell answered the concerns well re. his ezplanation of exploratory mining and RRR via the operational company not having control of who is on the land at any given time.

Zumore, responding to your most recent post, 17:44 and my reply at 19:35:

Young men, it seems young can still grow in height up to 20, thought I could remember some people having growth spurts at 18+.

One thing I had meant to say earlier, in the twitter post with the photos from 23/11/24 which you reposted at 17:44, there was a mispelt / mistyped reply from someone who meant to say they were probably artisanals and that it would be ideal to have good relations with them - I have paraphrased slightly, am in a bit of a rush so not verbatim but anyone can reed that reply and it seems to be referring to anyone doing physical work as artisanals and other to RRR. You have have either missed the reply, not appreciated the content of the reply or disregarded it as worthy of consideration before your posting your concerns - which have been responded to.

Re. 17:44: I think the person working near surface sat down with a bit of rock and pickaxe is young but could be 16-19. The young person walking behind the man is not necessarily the same person but if sood at full height would possible be shoulder height or more to the man who could perhaps be about thirty to forty years old and perhaps quite tall. I remember when I was younger a lot of my peers at 16 had quite a range in height and weight and some people still got a fair bit taller between 16 and 18.

In Britain from my research, it seems that at 16 one could work in furniture removal and some firms might employ at 16 or wait till 18 for that type of role. One can work as an apprentice on a bulding site at 16 and one can do some labouring tasks on a building site at 16.

In Britain it has been suggested that 16 year olds could vote in general elections and it was pointed out as justification for why such an idea would be reasonable, that 16 year olds can join the army but it was countered that 16 year olds wouldn't be asked to take part in front line duties.

Presumably at 18 the workload in various jobs in various countries is less restricted but is still regulated.

Re. 18:46: 25/05/24 - you seem to be referring to a discernible shadow Theeeduke but to dicern a definitive shadow as you seem to have put it is possibly a mistaken conflation.

Correcting 16:11: ... as per RNS 08/03/23.

47% is still around 50%, it is not 44% or 55% or the lesser or greater than the former or the latter of those two alternatives. I think my posts at 16:20 and 16:25 on 24/11/24 make the same basic point fairly well. RRR could adjust or may have adjusted their holding in ALR since 08th March 2023 and as long as it remains around 50% as per RNS 08/03/24, we don't need an RNS purely on that, in my opinion.

Banbury, I was going to get round to telling ya, I don't have any heroes but I"ll tell ya again - ya wrong...