Member Info for NikeAir180

I get that first point Helpful just seemed to me as if someone might have been leaning into that aspect a little bit, certainly was evocative me, my criticism of the slogan doesn't indicate how I voted because I always consider the candidate as well as the party.

Joking now, maybe I'm one of the few who has consistently had a soft spot for this company but there will often be some people who read without posting, a few fews perhaps, different types... most ordinary and unique in there own ways is my typical guess.

Have a good day...

Cotrecting myself: I always thought the few and the ordinary Joes don't have to be on the opposit sides of a good outcome, the many and the few could all do quite well sometimes. Unnecessary division doesn't help the greater good in my opinion.

The "few" potentially doing well doesn't mean that the ordinary Joes' can't do well as well, perhaps rich and not rich could all do quite well?

The "for the few" stuff reminds me of the Labour political slogan from 2019: "For the many, not the few". I always though an improvement of that type of sentiment would have been "For the many, not just the few". I naturally think the few and the ordinary Joes have to be on the opposing sides of a potentially good outcome.

Helpful, inspite of any carping from the sife lines, I think the balance of the day is with you because of the details in the Reach RNS you have been recently referring to - any confirmatory evidence that be provided in the future on that sort of timeline or even close to it backs up what might be a good phase. Your boots would be difficult to fill, no need to hang them up and repatedly asking / demanding for this yields no-one an Advantage card...

Good to see News here today as well, I saw a few of his posts on the Aquis part of this site yesterday. Was thinking might be a good time for some news.

One thing I will agree with Banbury is some of today is aspirational but it was still containing some specifics and it wasn't a weak kind of aspirational.

Perhaps in a few weeks, with a good wind...? there might be an RNS stating production has started. Anytime in the summer would still be a bright spot for me.

Cheers..

Below post is supposed to include "speeded up by a poorer economy than normal" and not "powered" which I note is indicative a re-write software glitch that sometimes occurs on this forum.

Cheers...

I do read both forums with the posts about this company. One thing I think all could agree us there is no poster here who could be blamed for a recent pandemic, Governments decisions and the debts that have built up with the acceleration of interestcrayes and the pressures tat put on iquidity. No poster here could be blamed for war in Europe and war in the Middle East and any pressures that would put on supply.

We now have elections in Britain and France, no-one can be blamed for what governments we end up with and what may or may not happen in the markets relating to that or strategic decisions right ir wrong that governments make, will we run out of energy or diversify sensibly? Plenty of energy on this forum...

One thing I will ad is international and local pressures were put on the food markets: local, international and individual when wealthier countries locked down affecting farmers and small and big sellers of all sorts of related items including spices. Has it ever been spicey here?

In some countries there may been more volatile over a longer time with government and population to the recent years Europe and this is not apples and oranges... but I do think some of the recent decisions richer countries have made have affected some of the developing countries, there may be a country not relating to RRR where there was an escalation in rival tribal strife butvI wonder did that get speeded up by the powered economy than normal?

We can all agree that food markets have been hurt recently, hopefully we'll recovered now but there is still environmental pressures and recent times thT affected farmers who mY sometimes have sold land in a rich country, farmers who protested in India and Europe, restaurants that who rested but some were under severe pressure.

I am not saying what was right wrong but it is something to possibly think about before pointing the finger and deciding who to blame when explaining cause and effect. I am not doing that either but ther always other things to consider when thinking anywhere about what has brought us to today.

Have a good one...

November 2022 not 2020...

But at least that leads into something else, hindsight allows many people to be wise after the event or look back to fluctuations and think they know why or choose to.blame someone. I think the ebb and flow is more complicated than a positive perceiving the possibilities of progress and contrasting events following comments.

Was able to check... December 2021 to February 2022 was okay for entry and exit or partial exit. March 2022 to November 2020 was also okay for entry and exit or potential exits and I think that extends through to January 2023. 2021 looks fairly stable as well?

Not the full five years but not all bad, personal circumstances and or consideration might have affected decisions.

2023 was a tough year for RRR, will the second half of 2024 start a recovery? That is the question I will ask myself and I will not in my outlook, make a potentially better possible future disappear into frustrations of the past.

To just tidy that up a little bit I'm assuming a range no wider than December 2021 to January 2023, concentrating on 2022, for possible entry and exit or partial exit points. Another consideration that I would have considered would also have been personal liquidity requirements and priorities of focus.

Am not going back five years but the whole of the last five years were not negative.

Cheers...

I guess looking back at that okay year it might be possible that someone could basically agree with Helpful butcalso look at what they think the market is doing at that time and also consider if there are any general and / or specific complications which could interrupt progress and whether any personal decisions would need to have been made and I am not inclined to blame Helpful for any individual decisions at my end, can't see how othes who seem fairly intelligent could realistically do so, I don't read much gullibility here and I have never seen a positive post aimed at the gullible, I have never read a gullible poster on this share chat.

Back to the present day, I think RRR are in an interesting phase and they might be an a good place but I wonder if that might like interest rates, involve a slight lag until positive affects effects might be felt.

I am left with a perception of the patience that might be required for upside verses tge present day risk which seems a similar general feature for many junior mining projects though the specifics will vary.

I didn't see the last one but perhaps England's draw in the football today was a more interesting one than the last one?

Cheers and all the best...

Blueboy1975, 2022 was an okay year fror RRR regarding share price acknowledging a little fluctuation but nothing too bad... I appreciate there might not have been any production. Regarding share price and potential entry and exit or partial exit that year was okay and I would possibly extend that range from December 2021 to January 2023, I am typing from memory but have previously checked this and I know the share price range for 2022 was okay, it would have been possible to make a small profit depending how big an exit portion versus commission - if that applied, it would have been possible to approximately break even. The entirety of the last five years has not been completely negative and Helpful's positive attitude would not have meant people would have as a result of reading and agreeing, consequentially ended up in deficit.

I've been reading this forum off and on for a year or two, the first time - apart from the generally positive sentiment - I recall Helpful saying "RRR is in a good place" was about two months ago, in a late evening reply to me and he included that comment as a strong bit of banter intended towards the naysayers. If that was the first time he was using, "in a good place" and I am confidant it is that time of the quote the naysayers are referring to, I suggest Banbury you might need just over 4 and 3/4 years for your negation to be literally accurate but within that time goodness may be found.

I have no view of that Banbury and I am not fretting too much, regarding any short term questions: in my mind, I am not making perfect enemy of the gold...

There is a good Forbes article describing the a variety of applications and when there was urgent historical need and why there could be supply shortage for high demand in the future from 2021 article by Forbes... "Antinomy: The most important Mineral you've never heard of".

Increasing NBGC asset ownership might have happened anyway as crystallising value was perceived by both POW and RRR to be theoretically simpler if one of the companies assumed whole ownership.

Geological exploratory work going on with NBGC asset, set up work going on with Faso Greenstones wih the aim of bringing to produçtion, RRR's focus seems to be clear.

And of course my last few comments are actually based from the 00:36 comment. Anyway within the next few days we will hopefully hear some positive news backing up the announced completion fror RRR total ownership of NBGC. Following on from what Maidit said, I think that ownership of the whole asset is positive for the company, if that changes for positive reasons in the future, I'll be pleased to read such news.

Looks like a sunny day outside, have a good day everyone...

Hah... another re-visit to 12:36 comentt, just to clarify it was supposed to be... regulatory oversight and not "insight" the predictive word thing is a bit of a not many people trifle...

Strategic (not starting) investments re. POW consolidation. Will rewind the re-run of Sky press review, perhaps with fresh tea.

Have a good day...

Sorry to re-visit mu comment from 12:36, POW share consolidation was actually motivated by stability which would then be assumed to be morea attractive for starting investments. I think this has been borne in recent months and although it is on the OTC market - that I not a direct reason for the consolidation.

CEG needs to agree a share consolidation in order for a specialist fund to be able to invest and I think that follows the joint venture completing.

As always I don't spend hours going over this, remembers something went back over, 20-30 minutes later I can watch Sky papers and unwind with a mug of tea.

Your welcome Maidit... I have liked both your remarks, acknowledging the first one was a friendly comment towards me, guess I have to say I think there is always some regulatory insight. POW actually did a consolidation for a good reason, so that they could also list on a specific US market where there is a requirement for a higher share price in order to trade. CEG have got an investment from a specialist fund but will have do a consolidation as part of the agreement - it is part of fair deal and follows a fairly recent announcent of an intended JV investment from Chevron. Not all consolidations will hurt the small shareholders, at least I hope not!

I appreciate Spec's comment and I will add you are often interesting to read and always likeable. I can't recommend every time if there are some bits that are too far away from my perspective on regulation or might qualify if I do but that would be boring... apart from this one!

Now.. in relation to someone's criticism of myself (no offence taken and it was just towards me...) I like all your posts based on my subjective feeling, objective thinking will influence whether I thumbs up or not and I might weight it up on balance, same goes for eveveryone else.

Good to see your posts here, appreciate you may need to focus elsewhere sometimes, I always appreciate them...