Member Info for NikeAir180

Nah... amounts that were believed to be receivable, warrants : ' ). IMO, a reasonable deal and RRR got £1,000,000 without relinquishing actual cash.

The 16:00 post was not always right.

Correction of spacing - 17:18.

From New Ballarat thread, 02/08/22:

Compelling new presentation. We'll worth a look for believers (and non believers - not too late to get in lol!) As if Congo and Elephant and Juno Royalty weren't enough - I feel this might just be RRR's moment.

I think the above is exactly or very close to exactly as Richemondo put it back then - typo included - not certain on how that bit was spaced - the words are correct and in the correct order - one paragraph - correct spacing - brackets, (my written copy was to much ... ).

Banbury falsely rearranged at 14:49 and he left out the context of the new presentation which seemed to be in regard of a new presentaion relevant to the post heading: New Ballarat.

As I said "might..." is not a prediction, and I think the rearrangement of words at 14:49, lost the element of banter which imbued a positive attitude to the other assets.

15:07 post was actually confirmation of not "allways right" (sic).

A rearrangement by Banbury at 14:49 of what Richemenedo had previously said and thus a misleading post then and at 15:07.

Thread: New Ballarat 02/08/22 (page 3 - Richemendo):

Compelling new presentation. We'll worth a look for believers ( and non believers - not too late get in lol! )

As if Congo and Elephant Oil and Juno Royalty weren't enough - I feel this might be RRR's moment.

The above quotation is is as Richemondo posted in 2022 and what motivated the post was New Ballarat and the new presentation - there might have been an element of banter as well as positivity with the other assets and "might ... " is not a prediction - the correctly quoted post is meaningfully different.

The 200k payment due to POW needs to go through by the end of today to keep up with the schedule laid out in the 21/07/25 RNS, an RNS to confirm that might not be published until monday next week, the previous paymnent due by friday 19th September was confirmed by an intraday RNS on monday 22nd September - which detailed some transactions.

Confirmation of the paid £200,000 that was due to POW by Friday 19th September 2025, was communicated by intra-day RNS on Monday 22nd September 2025.

In fact it is reasonably better than £250,000 - more like £262,500 - I had been subtracting 35% instead of 25%.

The Dalaroo share price is arond 25% less than 0.54 at the moment, around 25% less than £350,000 is pretty close to £250,000 in my opinion, it wouldnt surprise me if RRR have 10k somewhere, and it wouldn't surprise me if some of the money from Soma had accumalated interest which mighy have been a preference to paying off POW in one go and in last years annual report: £1,050,000 was referred to in relation to what was drawn down from an existing loan facility, so it wouldn't surprise me if they could find 10k or more from somewhere.

Not literally David but what you posted at 12:58 was with plenty of chronological time to spare between today, 13/11/25 and new year's eve: 31/12/25.

Nice try David, new year's eve means something to a lot of people and as you know you were quoting (12:58) with reference to 31/12/25 regarding the sale to Dalaroo.

Re. Banbury, 12:01 - it was a continuation on a path to production with a hope of first gold sales by the end of 2024, RNS - 07/10/24, and thus not with the same meaning as the first sentence of 12:01 - the equivalent of which was not in the public domain.

If 200k is paid to POW tomorrow - the balance still to be paid would be £254,449.67 and this is scheduled by 31/12/25.

A comparitively later time zone or another day - maybe.

10:31 - errant jockey, not funny.

It was two questions and the first one was a demand.

Meadow1948, you are wrong to demand anthing from me but even if you were to ask nicely - you have already been answered 100% correctly, I have no intention to dilute by reply.

... "pub car park" - not so.

Re. 09:24: not a surprise you said "Of course you don't" Banbury, regarding the 07/10/24, 06/11/24 and 18/11/24 RNS' proves you to be wong, reading of the 07/10/24 RNS might "continue on a path" to knowing further, that your post is false.

You were and would be wrong on that.

That would be mixing tenses and thus not 100% right.