Member Info for NOVECKINGOOD

Agree RNST and GreyPanther, we've come this far we might as well find out what it might be worth or not as the case may be. I wouldn't want Team Dullard in place either way at that point though. They'll no doubt manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of "Victory" again - somehow..

Please keep in mind I will expect to make money here whoever is in charge. Laurel and Hardy on the volatility - someone facing the right way as a better investment case.

In the interests of being 100% honest, the only thing I don't agree with is the plan to farm out WN at this stage. The horizontal well should be drilled first !! Apart from that they can get their coats walk hundreds of miles until they find a gate that says F off, open it and walk through..

Aye, keep doing the same things and expect a different outcome - that's sane behaviour..

Let me ask you how much more shareholder value they would need to destroy and how much they'd need to pay themselves before you'd consider letting someone else having a go ? If we were back to 0.1p and they were paying themselves a million between them would that be irritating enough ? Or would you never vote for change on a similar basis ? Just curious.

The proposers are shareholders at a higher level, so they have more skin in the game - do you not get it ??

Seen it so many times before, don't you just love the way most humans are wired. Moan about how crap something is but when given the opportunity to do something about it they don't like change. Moan about a falling share price, but rarely reducing or topping up to hedge it one way or another - just moaning. Moan about how crap the directors are but then vote to keep them rather than take a chance that someone who has built up a bigger shareholding at their own risk might do a better job.
My wife, my son and me have voted to replace these needy dullards. Part of me hopes that they stay just so that I can regularly rinse the moaners when they continue to moan - because nothing will change.

The paid UJO troll, no credibility no moral compass. Of course she supports S&S - birds of a feather.

All the purported fantastic news for your dogsh(1t) company Heid, the share price still languishes 15% below the last fund raise price.. Similar reasons for failure..!

The current value as dictated by the market is less than £22m, I think Apple is still significantly overvalued you think RBD is undervalued, it's irrelevant, the market decides the value. If it were really cheap it would be snapped up in a hostile takeover or you and me and everyone else that new about it would be buying more shares - we're not..

"A dearth of opportunity" yet sold at a bargain basement price. WN is worth billions, is it, is it really, will they get it based on their appalling track record to obtain what they thought (and you thought) was fair value for Corallian ??

How long do you think they knew that the second drill was going badly, the market knew (not sure why) because the share price was falling daily for weeks. Is it dishonest as a Director to keep this quiet, from my perspective I believe it is/was..

"I don’t think remuneration is far off average for the size / profile of the company"
Ok point me in the direction of another similar sized company where there are Joint MD's with combined compensation of over £700k per annum AND where part of this was paid as a bonus despite a share price that dropped by 75% during the same period ??!

To suggest it's the going rate for what I see as abject failure is completely farcical.

June 2022 - Price 34.5p You said "It’s been a month since the news of the non-binding offer so the buyer (credible = large, so my bet is Total) should be finishing up their work on Corallian shortly. I think we get a binding offer this week, or next at the latest. This is a bargain entry point"

When they received 12.5m for their share you've still fully supported the BOD and not once questioned anything ??!
Do the ;-
Salaries
Lack of Communication
Bonuses
Wealth Destruction
Dishonesty (IMO)
Inability to Negotiate a decent deal
Lack of Share ownership (being more aligned with their shareholders)
Re-negotiated share incentive schemes
Now trying to bribe us to keep them in power

Not make you think that they should have more oversight on their actions etc. - as a bare minimum?

Nohope, looking at the horses you've backed, a contrarian view to yours would be the most profitable way forward I suspect..

Smythery, why the fierce loyalty ?? They've fallen significantly short of your expectations since you landed here earlier in the year.
Never a backward step in promoting the company and its management - are you another with more skin in the game than a few shares - like Novy ?

I think it's important at this stage to be honest with people who are trying to make decisions so that they can do it objectively and not be skewed by company employees or directors mates.

What say you ?

Wise words Nohope

Bought a few £k last week as I felt it probably now oversold, poss takeover speculation at some point, and on interest rate expectations. Never expected some ok results, not yet anyway.

I'll hold and add on weakness now - finally something tangible to be slightly positive about. Risk and reward not great for Odey now which should also hopefully help over the next 12 months too.

Good to see some of the same old peeps on here.

GL

Agree Selfish and JD, but in their opinion (as stated in the BMR interview) there is a large disconnect between the value of the assets and the current share price. Surely if they believed what they were saying it's more free money on top of the free money they get for making the mirror steam up when they breathe on it. They can't possibly be short of funds to buy some more shares, they've been given or have stolen (depending on your viewpoint) loads of ours.

It doesn't add up Novy does it ??!

Novy, it’s sad to see you clutching at straws here. Albeit looking at the £4m bribe it seems to be widespread within the existing RBD set up, which it’s becoming increasingly evident that you are in some way a part of.
You need to change tack from trying to justify the salaries of S&S, it’s the wrong point to try and defend. It’s farcical.
Remuneration should be based on one’s ability to do the job and performance. Tell us why in a world where most are struggling to pay their bills that we need to pay two complete failures over £700k per annum between them, when the monies that have been given to them to create wealth is worth a mere fraction of what it was at outset. And whilst you’re at it what about their less than a 1% shareholding and bonus structures altered in their favour every time the share price collapses.
Summarise why you feel that they don’t have their noses in the trough and couldn’t give a stuff about their shareholders.

Sounds bad Novy, I agree.
What we could really do with is two directors who knew that the second drill at WN was failing, but not only kept quiet about it, they ensured that their co directors voted them a bonus. This was despite the share price falling around 75% during the corresponding period.

It’s salt of the earth put others first people like that we really need.

What's an RNSRNS?

It's what DB at UJO uses to warn his mates.. :o)

Or 50% since they got c£12.5m rather than c£50m for Corallian. You choose.

Jimmy, sorry to disappoint but I'm not underwater here. Once I sussed out what was going on I've traded the peaks and troughs - never getting in at the absolute bottom and never getting out at the top each time. But enough to get me back in front.. The way these charlatans play the game it's quite easy if you face the right way.
It's not about anything else for me than hating to see people at the top milking shareholders for all they can get. Let someone else have a go, let someone else try and play with a straight bat and see if they can unlock any value that might be here..

Lack of transparency, lack of honesty. Enormous mismanagement and value destruction for shareholders whilst taking huge salaries and bonuses. Who'd have thought that would have been their message ??!! Sadly most people are wired to object to and resist change, that's why many are trapped here - Jimmybob et al. Novykluk you don't count as you're on the inside and part of the problem not the solution..
They would have been sacked in the real world, now is our chance to remove them and move this company forward - for once..!!!!
Keep doing (or in this case believing in) the same things and expecting a different outcome - well ....

Cash must be returned to shareholders. We are satisfied that the Company has publicly announced that it will return £4m to shareholders. However, we note that this is subject to receipt of the second tranche of the proceeds from the share sale of Corallian Energy which is subject to the development and production consent from North Sea Transition Authority on or before 1 December 2023.

Historic Management Failings

The sale process of Corallian Energy was completed at significantly lower value than expected. Based on Corallian's historic average gas price valuations of the Victory licence, the Requisitioning Shareholders, no doubt together with the significant majority of other shareholders, expected a substantially higher sale price given the 2C economic valuation range of £146m to £193m. However, the final sale price was only £32m. Despite Reabold owning 49.99% of the share capital of Corallian Energy, net proceeds were only c.£12.7m. It is not clear how much of this is related to transaction fees, and how much relates to excessive fees and options payable to the board of directors of Corallian. Furthermore, one of the co-CEOs is a director of Corallian Energy. There are clear concerns that the directors of Corallian Energy may have been financially incentivised to pursue the sale and therefore declined to explore other, potentially more suitable and value accretive transactions, to the significant detriment of Corallian shareholders - specifically Reabold.

In 2021, the co-CEOs were remunerated a combined £716k. In this year the share price dropped from 0.64p to 0.17p, a 70% decline. Reabold's annual report for the year ended 31 December 2021 stated: "During the reporting period, the Board undertook a performance evaluation of the Executive Directors. The salaries were benchmarked to market and the committee considered the delivery of our strategic goals." The rapidly declining share price and loss for the year of £2.675m is completely at odds with this assessment. The Requisitioning Shareholders believe it shows a complete lack of independence by the incumbent non-executive directors together with a collective willingness for the incumbent directors to be remunerated to an excessive degree to the significant detriment of the Company's shareholders.

Furthermore, neither co-CEO holds a significant shareholding in the Company. Their combined shareholding accounts for less than 1% of the Company's issued share capital, creating a clear lack of alignment between their incentivisation and the best interests of Reabold's shareholders.

Requisitioning Shareholders presentation

A presentation from the Requisitioning Shareholders outlining the historic failings of the incumbent directors, current strategic weaknesses and the Requisitioning Shareholders' proposed strategy can be found at www.reaboldrequisition.com

The Requisitioning Shareholders strongly encourage all Reabold shareholders to support their proposals for change.

01 November 2022

Reabold Resources plc Requisitioning Shareholders Group

RE: Requisition of general meeting of Reabold Resources plc

Beneficial owners representing 6.93% of the issued share capital in Reabold Resources plc ('Reabold' or the 'Company') (AIM:RBD), whose shares are registered in the legal name of Pershing Nominees Limited (the 'Requisitioning Shareholders'), confirm they have served notice on the board of directors of the Company to convene a General Meeting ('GM') of Reabold's shareholders to pass resolutions focussed on creating sustainable shareholder value in the interests of all Reabold's shareholders and other stakeholders.

To enable positive strategic change and increased shareholder value, the Requisitioning Shareholders believe that the following actions must be taken:

· The Board must be changed to increase alignment between the Board and the Company's shareholder. The Requisitioning Shareholders believe that the current lack of clear leadership and accountability is impeding value creation, while CEO remuneration is excessive and unjustified given the current performance.

o The incumbent directors all be removed from the board.

o The Requisitioning Shareholders have proposed that, in place of the incumbent directors, Kamran Sattar, Cathal Friel, Francesca Yardley, and John McGoldrick (together, the 'Proposed Directors') be appointed to the Board. Francesca and John meet the test for being independent non-executive directors as recommended in the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association Stewardship & Voting Guidelines dated February 2022. If they are appointed to the Reabold board, the Proposed Directors will each forgo any cash payment for directors' fees and will instead be remunerated with £25,000 in equity for the first 12 months.

o A CEO, with relevant industry experience, be appointed to lead the Company.

· The Corporate Governance policies require robust changes to restore credibility in Reabold's governance practices. The Proposed Directors would urgently address several material deficiencies from recommended best practice that have been notified to the incumbent Board, most notably relating to the independence of the Chairman and director remuneration considerations - specifically the extension of share option expiry dates and the absence of performance conditions for long term incentive awards.

· The Company must realise greater value from its projects than it has previously, particularly the West Newton Asset. As such, the Proposed Directors would rapidly seek an experienced farm out partner to significantly de-risk the asset and help Reabold realise value in the next 6-12 months.

· New, non-dilutive, funding initiatives should be pursued to accelerate and maximise monetisation of the Company's assets.

"many companies are down and below what most objective holders would recognise as "fair value" right now! Doesn't mean the Diretors of all those Companies have "destroyed their value"!
"actually understanding the fluctuations in the economic cycle and that the value of almost all stocks is down now and likely below true value. YOU KNOW THAT!"

Really, are you 6 ?

Novy, I never said that they had destroyed the value of all of the assets that they hold, I was pointing out that if you'd bought into the big and shiny story at 0.9p then you're around 75% DOWN ON YOUR INVESTMENT - another fact

Baxter Basics is needed here. The value attributed to something can be calculated in a number of ways, with fine art and houses (as an example) it's a lot less scientific, with Stock and Shares or the amount of money in sterling in your bank account it's a lot more transparent. Value shouldn't be confused with cost, just because my Sushi for lunch today cost £6, it doesn't mean it's worth that, especially if I'm the only sad F()c(ker) that wants to buy it.
You seem to either want to skew this, or you just sadly lack the basic understanding of calculating value on RBD's assets. To suggest that the real value is much higher, but that the market has in some way been unkind to them is complete TRUSSONOMICS. You may be thinking of NAV or some other way of providing some basic calculations but it's Mickey Mouse to think that the NAV is the real value. The market decides. If everyone wanted to pay 0.5p for RBD shares because it's inevitable they'll be worth at least that sometime soon - then no-one would sell, and the price would be 0.5p - it's absolutely day 1, morning one investment class basics.

If you don't understand the basics, then you really shouldn't be investing...

"I'm now just waiting for NOVEKINGGOOD to argue that same falcious view" Albeit Nov has been managing money for clients since 1986 - you forgot that bit