Member Info for NikeAir180

Eddie, they are not new accounts, some people just don't post much, prefer to read?

I don't think his intention was to bury an nteresting article from the other week and we both had the same core interpretation, he developed his points in response. I respect both those posters and it was easy enough to read all the posts in one read through.

Yesterday I referred to a Wood led study re. Greater Sunrise development for which I think an article had previously been posted via link near 02/07/24, IFK responded via a few posts with his own emphasis but I broadly agree with him and I appreciate his reminder re. Gusmao having said they expect findings of report by November.

IFK, thank you for your posts, I have just re-read some of yesterday's. I think the duo might still be dynamic and / or perhaps have good timing but I do appreciate the 14:42 post and thank for the reminder that they expect the finding of the report on Sunrise options by November.

Thirty minutes ago a troll who does not know tried to have a go.

The 18:20 post on this thread is false.

Not the case Talkinto...

It might be less than 30% accross two wrappers though I can't be bothered to do the maths. One holdng is 54% down and haven't moved on it, other holding down 0.74% - including previous transactions average buy price is 0.17 versus average sell price of 0.16.

You should not specifically target other people when trying to reference share price decline, you should not assume people stay still when referencing share price decline and you should not assume you know the most likely share price response in the short term following the GM, I also do not know the most likely response.

... pertaining to Greater Sunrise Development...

The Wood led concept study for which engineering option - pertaining to Greter Sunride Development -would most benefit the host nation was intended to complete by the fourth quarter.

It will be interesting to see if there any further updates on that sudy within the next few weeks.

16:16 is factually incorrect but I would hold a door open for you.

Thanks...

This aritcle is worth a read if one has the time and inclination, the "shock quenching" method sounds interesting, I wish them good progress with that research.

... and / or...

Re. 08:47: Banbury it is false to say I offer no facts, opinions or personal views.

Regarding the AGM vote which you referred, I had no problem how that vote waa conducted, so I never thought it was wrong, I referred to a legal summary today that I read this morning because people can read around out of this setting if they wish to and jt was a valid way to help provide a balanced response.

Facts have been referred to by myself in the past and / they have sometimes been the backround context to responses.

It is not a fact that you know RRR will sink as a company so it is wrong of you to suggest "when".

The voting results were shown by majority via the "show of hands" - raising a hand to vote, the majority verdict - which is necessary for any vote to pass was referred to in the RNS that is on this thread and that RNS shows the result by majority outcome, if the show of hands had a different outcome - a different majority decision would have been referred in the RNS and would then have shown a different overall result.

I assume that many RRR shareholders don't post on RRR share chats - if so - majority for voting outcomes would be determined beyond what might appear to be majority views expressed here and in such situation may or may not concur but is what would decide outcome.

I did, via internet search, read a legal summary of the two voting methods for shareholder meetings and it was balanced with positive and less positive pointsin relation to both methods.

One resolution was withdrawn from that AGM vote and others were passed by a show of hands.

I think it is an over-interpretation to suggest shareholders views were ignored, in fact the evidence of the RNS from the time would literally suggest shareholders views were considered.

I think it is legitimate to use the "show of hands" method and the "poll" method. I think it is legitimate to choose either one of those methods to conduct such voting.

The 01:00 post doesn't seem to be very confident thst the naysaying perspective will win out.

Eligible grannies would be welocome at the general meeting and their vote(s) would count.

News, I read a couple of share chats over there and the joke story on RRR is not that to which you referred.

The relevance to here is, that it is not relevant...

Zeus might not agree all of the time...

One variation in response to "the infinite monkey theorum" might be: that less time would be required to produce something, with type of wit, of 06:57.

Ha ha... I meant: I think the 18:00 post is about as relevant as telling a wall to stand still.

18:10 might have some relevance.

I think the 18:10 post is about as relevant as telling a wall to stand still.

Re: 14:15: You are mixing different concepts there Banburyboy re. your question which deserves no further response.

Your next RRR post had no relevance to this share chat chronology.