Member Info for NikeAir180

An accidental swap... of photos by someone, somewhere. Not really "the end of" is it Banbury. There was a replies section to a creative article, the replies of Bell and Winnifrith were supportive of each other and successful in my opinion as I have responded on this several times. Helpful has also given a good response on this several times and so has News once when he was discussing spodumere in relation to one of the photos - which if memory serves correctly was not one of the mixed up ones, it was along technical lines - process to do with spodumere, lithium and hard rock, I couldn't re-hash it, beyond my knowledge and memory without reading it again but did understand it the time.

It remains the case Zumore, as can be inferred from a reply from you to me on 05/07/24 that I do not consider Helpful to be a liar.

The link you provided with your comments that day can be carefully read through...

I agree to the extent that I think Helpful was mixing a non-comment from you with a comment from Booboo, accidental swap by him, in my opinion. I possibly said around that time that other posters thought you knew such and such a person and alo mixed you up with booboo with regard to one of his comments, can't remember if I said that or not but I certainly remember the general stuff I read on that... quite well.

I think you said somewhere that you may have known someone who was a poster by a new nickname - the opinion of others and you did not know if it was the case or not - fair enough.

Think you also said and I will paraphrase from memory: you hadn't interacted (on this website) with original nickname of poster. My interpretation of those comments is you hadn't known him here and by interacting - for the purpose of this, I extend that conceptually, to reading soneone's comments.

Zumore you have been posting or at least a member of this website since 2013, doesn't mean you have been posting on Regency Mines (which became Corcel?) since 2013. An assumption by Helpful - not directly to do with RRR - doesn't mean he was lying even if a mistaken assumption - just incorrect - perhaps.

It did occur to me back in those summer months that a poster from another website who, at one time, agreed with someone that he was Zumore had, regardless of if that was true or not, been a member of that website for longer: so could have read the poster of another nickname over here - it is logically possible but so is the alternative.

Now, regardless of what is so or not so, I was previously reminded of your sometime attitude to another poster of more recent times, there is just a hint of it on 05/07/24 and of course I do have a good memory for that as I did interact with that poster.

Humour wise... although different in content you did remind me (by my own reading at least) in aspect towards that person, of another - sometimes that reminder of aspect occurs to me similarly with your occasional elements of humour towards or regarding Helpful.

Humans often share some similarities: from time to time this helps some of us recognise humour, the first plural is deliberate and it is not conceptually limited to one reader of another.

Zumore, your bet of 22:48 might be right but beyond that are you like a king or a wizard?

Blueboy1975, you are about as creditable as yourself.

Re. 17:56... Less simply: Banbury, do you believe a truck is in storgage?

Re. 17:56: very simply, it is an export out of Zimbabwe.

A bit of exaggeration at the start of your 16:43 comment Banbury? I remember some moderate poistivity from you albeit with the condional "if" re. potential lithium production.

You also (and I paraphrase) occasionally postulated on occasion that the RRR deal with POW for 100% of RRAL / NBGC was in trouble... (not praphrasinng now:) at one time stating your opinion that it would not complete.

I do respect some of the humour but at the same time the 16:48 from Banbury is an alternative example of inflation.

... I have no idea how things will progress for RRR over the next two to six weeks, let alone after but any proof of concept within a reasonable range for initial gold production will be on the minds of some and not just naysayers.

I did a bit of rounding of rounding down from what Helpful said and the price of gold per ounce, working of 30oz for 10 days x 3 = £180000 if I'm not completely mathematically stupid and that is only about 11% away from the intersting figure of £200000.

I have no of how things will progress at RRR over tge next two to six weeks, let alone aftbut any proof of concept re. initial production

So if as Banbury says at 09:19, there was a RRR rns saying the relevent material had been paid for and if as Helpful has said (perhaps slight paraphrasing...) it is being stored at no cost to ALR and RRR, there is nothing mysterious about Helpful saying it is at no cost.

Neither Helpful or RRR are obliged to say anything more at this time and of course in the future we might here something more from RRR.

Now the above point is not far away from something I said previously said whilst considering stored lithium: it is perfectly possible I could have ordered something and paid for it in advance but I have delayed as a matter of convenience picking the item up, maybe I intended to, after three days and it went to seven as opposed to a approximately one year but such is life. Rather fortuitiously as I was considering typical commercial items, slightly less typical gold and silver bars came to mind. In theory I could buy gold and silver bars, pay for them to be stored securely, change my mind about picking them up (collecting them) if the price dropped significantly and pay for them to be stored securely for a longer amount of time.

Obviously some people will pay for gold and silver bars to be stored securely and are happy for them to still be professionally stored during good precious metal prices; there are various scenarious beyond these for for how a person could interact with gold and silver, I was providing a light hearted theoretical example, and there are various articles and a some you tubes videos which are quite interesting. I think it is good when reading or listening to anything to consider the quality of the individual source / content creator(s)and consider where possible more than one quality viewpoint or if there is largely consensus there may still be some nuance which might be interesting, occasionally a reader or listener might have some of there own originality and then they can test that against themself and or other viewpoints. But for how long? perhaps one does not want to get stuck umming or aahing, rolling a stone up a hill... but perhaps choose to go up a hill for long enough to have the fresh air for the clarity of mind to make a decision, perhaps with a nice view.

Some of tha above hilly stuff could be real or conceptual like a meditation but I do guess strongly that there is a real hole where there is some "white gold".

And meant to say that I also don't think anyone who comments here would have have been positively startled regardless of who might have alternatively posted another's tweet - where someone was imagining a future sunday newspaper article, which would still have been in the past now.

Zumore he can take you off filter or not, it is up to him, I suppose green boxes appear if people filter and some may check in now and again anyway. Obviously people have a right to privacy.

I remember that tweet re. sunday newspaper , Helpful did say "no idea if is true or not", I thought, on balance, it was unlikely but if he hadn't posted it I wouldn't have read it and it was interesting even if it was incorrect.

Perhaps if someone else had posted it here without the caveat "no idea if it is true or not" it might have created a bit of excitement and false momentum, but it seems like there are some wise posters on both sides of the debate so I don't think anyone who comments here, was positively startled by it.

Perhaps the tweet was a joke or an ironic comment? Are some of his other tweets a bit more considered? I think there was another one from that tweeter, posted here, which was more plausible but obviously a matter of that tweeter's opinion and with opinions before facts can support or negate, they are just opinions, as originally expressed - at a moment in time.

It is very rare that I would agree with Banbury on anthing Helpful and I still don't agree with his interpretation but I think you should consider taking Zumore off filter and having a quick read through.

My considerarations are that the lithium price collapsed by 80% in 2023, Helpful believed his 15th November 2023 comments and was writing logically... in my opinion.

Any prospective buyer(s) can change their mind perhaps because of over supply and collapse in price, prospective buyer(s) somewhere in the lithium market may have wanted to subsequently sell on but tactics may have changed bearing in mind storage capacity and the pricecdrop and something like that could have rolled down to ALR.

As you say Helpful, lithium was exported to Beira and some product is also stored in Harare, according to RRR - 28/03/24.

RRR holders can look forward to futher updates from RRR, no rush.

Cheers...

Re. 18:41: Always difficult to know the reasons for a buy or a sell unless one is speaking for oneself.

...strategy.

Sometimes when strategy is not as easy to discern their may be tactical flexibility.

When RRR were invovlved with production from the El Limon Gold and Silver mine, they - through their operational company - did not do a full assessment of what was there, pretty much just got on with it - learning more about their asset as they started producing - when relevant commodity prices were good it was a profitable and expense justified operaration and their success with that asset and stratergy does show some of the nimbleness junior mining companies are capable of. It was an efficient way to reach profit.

The 15:47 from Banbury, does finish with a creation, of exaggeraration with false conflation.

Balancing out Zumore's negativity of 13:46 and 13:47: Elemental Altus' do hve a royalty for part of the RRAL potential gold assets, this was announced previously in a POW and RRR RNS. The royalty had previously been set up by Altus Strategies - by their leadership at the time and that company had a "merger of equals" with Elemental', which is chronlogically, why Elemental Altus... would have it now.

Helpful, do you mind reminding please which part of the assets the royalty is for, as far as I am aware the status is till the same, off the top of my head I am thinking Berringa?

Thanks

Regarding penultimate sentence of 09:40: Banbury, you don't know that, unwise to pretend you do.