Member Info for OAPK20

You say “opinions are opinions,” yet your responses address posters rather than the substance of the points raised.

Repeated self-reported buying is not analysis.

If conviction exists, it should be expressed through facts, structure, or risk — not volume of posts.

The log is purely factual: dates, quotes, and implied timeframes. No interpretation, no judgement. It exists to track time-bound claims against outcomes — nothing more. Observing patterns in posts is not “point scoring,” it’s about separating evidence from speculation.

SmoothOperater

RE: Funding in place for the RTO to complete

Today 17:15
“Feel it was an overreaction regarding the ATM facility, let's see what next week brings, possible price rebound as they edge forward in the process to completing the RTO.”

Implied timeframe: Next week

Event referenced: Generic timeframe anchoring bias for “possible price rebound”

Outcome: Pending

amadan

RE: SP down 27% in one day

5 Feb 2026 06:38

Yesterday's RNS was transformational!!!
Here's hoping for another transformational RNS this week which doesn't dilute!

Implied timeframe: This week

Event referenced: Generic timeframe anchoring bias for “transformational RNS”

Outcome: Expired

Make5Mil

RE: Gearing up for the finale

4 Feb 2026 08:20

IMHO in the next 2-4 weeks a significant RNS to drop !!

Implied timeframe: next 2-4

Event referenced: Generic timeframe anchoring bias for “significant RNS

Outcome: Pending

SmoothOperater

RE: It’s coming home, I can feel it in me waters

1 Feb 2026 10:45

Looking forward to next week here.

Implied timeframe: next week

Event referenced: Generic timeframe anchoring bias

Outcome: Expired

SmoothOperater

RE: Resistance Broken!

30 Jan 2026 12:38

I'll say it.. you won't want to be out of this over the weekend LMAO

Implied timeframe: next week

Event referenced: Tongue in cheek pump

Outcome: Expired

SmoothOperater

RE: Firmed up

29 Jan 2026 10:11

CPR News is due IMO within days.

Implied timeframe: within days

Event referenced: Generic immediacy anchoring bias for CPR News

Outcome: Expired

Watching2

Rns

28 Jan 2026 16:28

Something is brewing 
Rns in the morning 😬

Implied timeframe: Next morning

Event referenced: Generic immediacy anchoring bias for RNS

Outcome: Expired

SmoothOperater

RE: Firmed up

28 Jan 2026 15:35

“Expecting completion to come 3 to 4 weeks after CPR. IMO”

Implied timeframe: 3 to 4 weeks after CPR

Event referenced: RTO completion

Outcome: Pending CPR

SmoothOperater

RE: Firmed up

28 Jan 2026 11:18

“CPR news due imminently IMO”

Implied timeframe: Imminently

Event referenced: Generic immediacy anchoring bias for CPR News

Outcome: Expired

SmoothOperater

RE: Very quiet

26 Jan 2026 09:09

“Likely weeks, subject to approvals.”

Implied timeframe: Weeks

Event referenced: Classic timeframe bias: Projecting confidence + escape hatch.

Outcome: Timeframe asserted not derived

SmoothOperater

RE: I've increased again today

25 Jan 2026 10:22

“expecting the newsflow to start at anytime.”

Implied timeframe: “anytime”

Event referenced: Generic immediacy anchoring bias

Outcome: Pending “anytime”

Amadan

RE: New FCA rules from Monday

18 Jan 2026 19:22

Can't wait for next week's Announcement Window 😍

Implied timeframe: next week

Event referenced: Generic timeframe anchoring bias

Outcome: Expired

amadan

RE: Considerations

18 Jan 2026 13:13

News due: updated CPR and prospectus. Will news arrive next week?

Implied timeframe: Next week

Event referenced: Generic timeframe anchoring bias for updated CPR and prospectus.

Outcome: Expired

SmoothOperater

RE: New FCA rules from Monday

16 Jan 2026 15:28

Primarily PEEL, they are recycling stock ahead of a regularity inflection point.

“Bodes well for next week IMO”

Implied timeframe: Next week

Event referenced: Generic timeframe anchoring bias for “regularity inflection point.”
Outcome: Expired

SmoothOperater

RE: New FCA rules from Monday

16 Jan 2026 12:22

News could come anytime from Monday as per rules change

Implied timeframe: Anytime after 19th January.

Event referenced: Generic date anchoring bias

Outcome: pending

SmoothOperater

New FCA rules from Monday

15 Jan 2026 14:42

If there's an announcement window, it will open from the 19th January.

Implied timeframe: Anytime after 19th January.

Event referenced: Generic date anchoring bias

Outcome: pending

Worth being careful with “this week / next week” language.

Time-specific optimism tends to inflate expectations faster than facts arrive.

“ he was spouting same things the year before. Cost me and many others so much money and he’s at it again!! Shameless”

To be fair the only person who loses your money is you.

Ascent doesn’t “own” the gas in the ground – the state always does. What Ascent owns are the economic and contractual rights to develop and monetise Petišovci.

The arbitration isn’t about who owns the field. It’s about whether Slovenia (via state-controlled JV partners and regulators) unlawfully blocked those rights.

Post-arbitration it’s basically:

• Cash compensation (most likely), or

• Rights reinstated (less likely)

So ownership of the field doesn’t really change – the question is whether Ascent gets paid for losing its rights or gets them back.

Time-bound optimism without milestones usually creates disappointment, not value. Yesterday’s RNS was structural, not transformational.

A few points to separate structure from interpretation:

• ATM facility = up to £10m over a minimum 1-year term

• Initial 720,820 shares (2.99%) already issued to Axis at par and will be sold into the market

• Warrants exercised: 631,578 shares @ 10p (~£63k cash)

• CLNs converted: £387,550 @ 10.52p = 3,664,923 shares

• Total new shares in this RNS: 5,017,321

• Total shares post-Admission: 29,124,930

An ATM is a capital supply mechanism, not a timing signal. It exists to be used when liquidity allows, not “after” a value event by design.

While management states an objective of minimising dilution, the capacity itself introduces ongoing supply and price-dependent funding risk. Intent does not remove structure.

If fully drawn at ~10p, £10m implies ~100m additional shares. That possibility is embedded regardless of whether or when it is used.

This RNS improves runway and reduces near-term funding pressure. It does not change UPSA RTO economics, de-risk completion, or alter the contractual ~3% post-RTO position for legacy holders.

ATM facilities are typically used when optionality exists but certainty has not yet been earned.

Notice the lack of replies……..

The ATM isn’t a value-timed bet — it’s liquidity financing.

If fully drawn at ~10p, it adds ~100m shares, taking the pre-RTO count to ~129m (≈77% dilution).

Those shares still roll into ~3% of the enlarged group at RTO, so they’re diluted again.

ATMs fund survival and process, not returns.

Did you bank profits ? Or still holding ?

Market makers don’t signal conviction — they facilitate flow.

With an active ATM and recent issuance, inventory changes reflect liquidity provision and hedging, not a directional view on the RTO outcome.

MM presence does not equal endorsement.

The RNS shows an ATM facility + warrant/loan conversion, which is standard bridge financing when optionality is high but certainty is still low. It supports working capital and RTO costs, but it is not growth capital and does not validate valuation.

ATM facilities improve short-term solvency, not long-term equity value, and introduce ongoing supply by design. That’s normal ahead of a high-uncertainty event like an RTO.

Upside still depends on the prospectus, funding terms and asset de-risking. This RNS doesn’t change those economics — it just extends the runway.

AMG is a legitimate shell RTO with a real industrial asset, but the £1bn headline valuation is marketing, not market-clearing reality. The CPR improves credibility but does not eliminate inferred-resource risk, funding risk, or dilution shock. The current share price move is BB-led anticipation, not institutional validation. Upside still exists — but it now requires everything to go right, while downside only needs time and clarity.

What have you posted ? What does it specifically prove please?

Worth keeping this factual.

Today’s RNS states:

“The Company also announces that it has received four Notices of Exercise from existing warrant holders in respect of 17,045,455 warrants.”

It does not disclose who exercised, nor their motive. Attribution (e.g. Gillini) and intent (maintaining %, no forward selling) are assumptions, not confirmed facts.

What is confirmed:

• 17.0m warrants exercised by four existing holders

• Admission of placing shares, warrant shares and prior investment shares on 3 Feb

• Post-admission issued share capital: 339.3m shares

Participation and exercise are clearly supportive, but anything beyond that (who / why / trading behaviour) isn’t stated in the RNS and can’t be proven from volume alone.

What’s striking is that early CMRS Agadir Melloul drill hits (~0.8–1.4% Cu near surface, with Ag credits) are comparable on grade to Managem’s Tizert copper system (~0.9–1.0% Cu). The key difference is scale and drill density — Tizert is defined over tens of millions of tonnes, while CMRS is still at the very start of that curve.

Those remarks referred to the timing of Peel Hunt TR1 disclosures, not to price action in general. TR1s are factual. Interpretation ends where disclosure begins.