Member Info for okenia

Funnily enough though, about half the world's Cobalt comes from DRC. The assets in that country are stunning which is why people make the effort - despite the additional challenges. That being said, if someone finds a big Cobalt deposit in sunny Surrey (great infrastructure etc) there's still several log orders more chance of it being dug up on DRC than Surrey. And a tailings project removes exploration risk and time to cashflow. A good strategy for a company like RRR. However investors are uneasy about the DRC - which gives an opportunity if rrr pull it off. Cash is cash is cash, at the end of the day.

Maestro - we're not making fun. This is someone with baggage who won't take ownership of their own investments decisions, and m

The trouble with older investors like Mr Muscle is that (as per their stage in life?) they spend too much time looking back and brooding over their (sorry, someone else's - the ********!!!) mistakes and error, as opposed to looking forward as to how to make ££!!

"It wasn't my fault I lost money, no no nooooo..." Retrospective validation is a terrible curse

The issue here is that an investor seeking to make a return has to take a position BEFORE the value-enhancement news, not wait until it has announced the news and re-rated. Investing is about the change in value AFTER you invest, not the value AT the point of investment. Otherwise I'd be a zillionaire by simply buying APPL shares tmrw. That's all the more true on AIM where SP is set by the MMs, and news comes at 7am giving them an hour to adjust the price upon news before you get to buy. So if RRR release a game-changing RNS at 7am tomorrow, the price will already have up-ticked before you have the opportunity to take a position. For example. I agree that in a FTSE100 co you can just hold and let gradual accretion get you 5-10% per annum steady growth. I don't think your typical RRR investor is looking for that risk/reward profile. Maybe leave RRR to investors who actively want this RR profile and stick to shares that better suit you? Just 'cos it doesn't suit you doesn't mean it doesn't suit others ... just saying' ...

Ten days ago in the RNS about expanding the skill set of the Board. You can read quite a bit into that RNS if you engage zee leetle grey cells.

Or even closer to home - Ramu Nickel in PNG. http://www.highlandspacific.com/current-projects/ramu-nickel It exports MHP to China. "Basamuk Process Plant: The Basamuk process plant incorporates three High Pressure Acid Leach (HPAL) trains (autoclaves) and is designed to produce 78,000 tonnes (dry) of mixed hydroxide product containing 32,600 tonnes of nickel and 3,300 tonnes of cobalt per annum. The plant has a two train acid making facility as well as a limestone processing plant for making the key reagents used in the making of the mixed hydroxide product. Exports and Sales: Since production started in 2012 mixed nickel cobalt hydroxide intermediate product has been exported to China where contracts are in place to receive the product. Up until the end of 2016 a total of 81,385 t of nickel and 7,901 t of cobalt in an intermediate form has been sold"

Vale's nickel laterite mine in New Caledonia (a country that produces 7% of global nickel). Vale make nickel oxide at New Caledonia and ship it to their processing facility in China (Dalian). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goro_mine http://www.vale.com/EN/aboutvale/news/Pages/conheca-nossa-operacao-niquel-nova-caledonia.aspx "Next, the nickel is recovered from the concentrated solution of chloride, by means of decomposing the nickel chloride at high temperatures (around 800°C) inside a special reactor, transforming itself into a product of granulated nickel oxide. This product of nickel oxide is then transported to Vale’s refinery in Dalian, China, to be converted into a product of metallic nickel for the stainless steel market. The cobalt is recovered from the cobalt chloride solution as a product of cobalt carbonate, which is sold on the cobalt market."

Mixed hydroxide product. Oxide isn't hydroxide.

You're fascinated by the shareholder register of the JV partner. That appears to place you in a select group of one.

Yes, in effect the authority is used for the warrant issue.

Yup that's my understanding of the math If you didn't have it that way then RGM would have signed a contract to deliver shares to warrant holders that it wouldn't necessarily have guaranteed authority to do. There's no conditional clause in the warrant instrument. Likewise, the CLNs at rrr confer the absolute right on the holder to convert at their discretion. So again takes an allocation of the current authority. The related point is that if no authority is requested for the next year, that doesn't retrospectively affect warrant / CLN holders. For the same contractual reason.

Good job MHP isn't nickel oxide then

Vigorous discussion is fine (although a little more focus on the company as opposed to other posters wouldn't go amiss - and I know I'm no angel in that respect!). But there's one or two people here who have made statements that clearly go over the line. RRR/RGM has prior form for going after specific individuals who do so. Andrew himself has posted on LSE recently when one particular individual not so much stepped over but lept feet-first across that line. Some individuals are smart enough to use 'what-if' innuendo ("how would you feel if Andrew ate babies for breakfast? Shouldn't shareholders be told?" style). In general I suspect the Ex-Wives Club is more about emotional as opposed to financial need, which is perfectly understandable and human.

Yes the issue is the illiquidity of JMS That suppresses the price - who wants to hold stock in an illiquid share? Get Jupiter properly listed and that alone will attract buyers and thus affect the valuation

RRR is getting a dividend (ie cash plus no change in their proportional holding of JMS) of about £1m per annum currently. Finger-in-air, let's pick say a 10% yield, and RRR's stake would be worth £10m. More than covers the mcap and brings in a wall of cash while we wait.

Dan - the buy-back is non-dilutive. Rrr own 1.2% of JMS. After the buy-back they'll still own 1.2%. Plus will have $500k in cash extra. Really, what's not to like!

And another ~ �400k due in a few weeks from JMS for the next half year dividend. As Del Boy would say, a 'nice little earner'.

I appreciate 'research' is a seven-letter word to you booboo, but RRR have raised �1m in the last two months. It's in several RNSes, such as the latest: 14 December 2017 Red Rock Resources Plc, the natural resource development company with interests in gold, steel feed materials and oil production, announces, further to the announcements of 10 November 2017 and 12 December 2013, that it has raised �290,000 by the issue ("Tranche 2") of �290,000 of Convertible Notes ("Notes") with accompanying Warrants ("Warrants") to a high net worth investor. Andrew Bell, Chairman, comments: "The Tranche 3 placing completes the �1,000,000 Convertible Note issue. We welcome in this tranche the participation of an existing shareholder, value investor Peter Gyllenhammar AB. Once more, we draw attention to the fact that the conversion into Shares is at 0.8p, which is a premium to the market price. We shall use the proceeds to further reduce our exposure under the back to back financing facilities we took out to enable our investment in the Steelmin ferrosilicon plant at Jajce, and for general business purposes."

Yes a discussion board is somewhere one can post ex cathedra statements and other people just quietly nod and keep quiet. I'll drop a line to LSE admin and ask them to rename this thread "Zumore's thought for today"