Member Info for NikeAir180

Fair enough News re. 13:02, that is your perogative and I think you are referring to 11:50 today as the most recent (I haven't read interim posts). The 01:16 post I reported and it has been removed, I regarded that as unacceptable, without question. I am not endorsing 11:50, but I do not regard it as a serious breach.

You and I have disagreed on occasional matters, though in a polite manner; with banter I will say: once some years ago (I was the se age as Theeeduke by the time he had his twenty winners) I was referred to as a clown, a friend of mine had to stay behind as others left the classroom and get a shout down, I later had to see relevant authoritive person after school and had a long but fair talking down to - which was taken in good spirit. Fact is, I was a clown that day and deserved it, was just one day and the clowning of us both was regarding the situations taught and the person with authority whose tone of voice was very distinctive (and was occasionally subject to consenting and organised comedy performed by a talented actor / mimic) - who without contradiction I have always liked and respected. He was in charge of discipline so it was not dishonourable clowning. : )

I probably have a soft spot for such reference depending how it is put and hope you don't mind this example of banter but I don't disagree with you in principle re. 11:50 and you are not as was described.

Thank you for, often, interesting posts News and the spirit of your efffort which is not without your own humour. : )

Intraday high with a range to that, perhaps, regarding 29th July...

News, please check Theeeduke's post at 11:38 on 29th July - there may have been a 57.45% rise that day and a 31 million sell was referred to, think it was at 11:38.

Re. 01:48 Specinvestor99, I have never said News has "no feelings/emotions", you were not replying to such: in fact or within chronology. Do not falsely attribute comment and / or quotation to myself.

Re. 01:16: The 17:24 post on 10/09/24 - opening rhetorical question, context, final paragraph, rebuttal of question, correctly explained by me not on the basis of feelings or based on an understanding of feelings but from an understanding of the language that was used and a correct outline of the chronology.

News, 00:52... that is the full twitter name... regardless of how it is laid out in the share chat post and it might be closer together on the twitter name if you press on the photo of the tweeter. Cheers for now...

Re. 1942 10/09/24: Specinvestor99, your 17:46 10/09/24 comment provided a quote which you said was embarrassing for News, I consider it not be embarrassing because that aspect was started by News at 17:24 09/09/24, it was a rhetorical question at start of the final paragraph - the whole of which provides the full context and he refutes the opening question followed by LOL - it was a joke as well as points made. Your reply "No..." was at 17:35 09/09/24 and News replies to that on the same evening which you referenced by quotation at 17:46 on 10/09/24. Because of the correct chronology I have outlined and because of the full context of the final paragraph of News' 17:24 post 10/09/24 it is not embarrassing for him and that also applies to his reply to your reply that you quoted at 17:46 on 10/09/24.

The question at 17:24 was merely rhetorical, it starts the final paragraph of News' 17:24 09/09/24 post and the totality of that paragraph refutes the opening question via the whole context of the paragraph.

Re. 18:44: But you responded to his earlier question from 17:24 09/09/24, he countered that response with what you quoted today at 17:46.

Dukey - cool... but that is to most of 14:39 : )

Re. 14:22: Outside of the context it may have appeared in this share chat, some Brits could know the word you refer to News, people can have dual nationality because of where they were born but their heritage could be British or Congolse as examples, they could theoretically have spent some years growing up in the country where that word was used (in the British heritage dual national variance) or they could have friends from that country, terms to describe things could have been compared at some point or people could be in relationships and over time and meeting others from that basis some words might be learnt.

I say this News as non-limit example because I know some of how one or more could reply, and I might have anyway more briefly, I know what you mean though and back to the context of the original occurrence from a poster, that was one I think I missed so don't know too much about that.

Ahem ahem! I do apologise : ) typos... I have probably now apologised in more than one way : )

Ahem, I do aplogise: typo - should have been, in more than one way.

News, I don't know much about horse racing but to have ridden 20 winners by 14 could have referred to pony racing, am assuming some similarity between regulations now and 30 or so years ago, one would assume horse racing will have been taken up afterwards and there may may have been some more winners and / or competitive participation. The remark including: "was known to me" can be interpreted on more than one way and I didn't interpret the same way as you, usually corrections are valid, they don't always require or suit apologies.

Re. 13:54, he apogised to me directly once, I did not ask for an apology, he also apologised both directly and in general on an am time detail, that was relaxed but still not asked for or required but clearly showing capacity.

I was reading that conversation at the time Theeeduke in June, you didn't correct News in his over-interpretation at the time regarding meeting a great so it is a bit precious of you and Zumore to want an apology, the correction was noted and I think News was grateful to Zumore for saving a search which may not have been as efficient as the process Zumore used, I wouldn't have used that quick logic. Had News done the search and found he was mistaken he would either clarified, bearing in mind your comments had more than one possible interpretation, though I sure he woukd have acknowledged his mistake, on the other hand he might have apologised.

I have alogogised before when I have made a mistake and I know News has as well, let's not go down this road...

A wise man probably won't give a public opinion regarding what will happen on friday or the next few days for this stock. Just because one asks for an opinion doesn't mean one can expect a reply. By way of reply it is possible some can be quicker with subtlety or perhaps someone just didn't want to reply. I can conceive of a few possibilities this week for RRR but I don't favour either on the basis of likelihood.

News, thank you, I read all of your posts on here and I think I know what you are alluding to, I am probably generally aware of that one, thanks.

Good point Chrismills, there has been dilution but also a possible increase in asset size, realised after my previous point I hadn't included that aspect which provides further balance - range, also will be interesting how the Philipine joint venture compares on paper re. oil equivalent to Durobin, regardless I am happier with the updated joint venture / secondary asset if confirmed. It seems since board changes the strategy is a little bit more focused and the communication is more regular and inclusive, easily accessible re. video interviews.

Yes Meadow, we will have to wait and see like many I like AB, haven't seen the most recent interview yet... Totally agree it is pointless to predict share price particularly timing but people have read relevant research notes and can adjust for dilution, best not to get too impatient, progress seems good. I think we both liked the posts of HFB, I though he spoke wisely when he said it was about market cap and let's face it that poster knows what they are talking about re. volume and break out range with the caveat that no-one knows the future re. relevant direction of travel and possible undulations.

As we are in a news period there will possibly be more posters, there's going to be some enthusiasm and for some of them it will be the excitement of new investment showing signs of progress. Sometimes they might need to be corrected but hopefully long time holders will be quite welcoming even if just by quiet attitude, we were all new investors once.

All the best for now...

So yeah: 23:05, I don't think Meadow is a troll but even if Willec has only been here for several weeks, I think he is still serious so long term holder and recent holder (or poster - not all holders post) both persons can be serious.