Member Info for Pdub

Faramog … some of your comments:

24.08.21 “then ask to join it .... only real reason it started was because of the infestation here that made this site unusable”
(exactly what I just said!)

15.08.21 “yes ... just looked .. apparently closing a self funded information website means you have sold out !
Pillock !”
(Glad to see you also like to call out people for a different view. Shows you are willing to defend your investment against unreasonable comments. Good for you.)

Faramog I will accept your criticism to some extent and respond only with agreement and a compliment. See above.

Hope that is nice enough for you LoL

Let’s put it this way Faramog. When folks stop making provocative comments about people that offer their full support to BMN and the BoD I will have every reason to be ‘nice’.

“ I suppose basking in the optimism of like minded investors will give every member a warm feeling”

“ Pdub, my problem is when positive spills over into delusion”

Forgive me for not just rolling over.

And when is that … in your humble opinion.

If someone is more positive than you approve of that makes them delusional? Really? If that is what you are saying I would say how arrogant. That is just the kind of thinking that drives people away. It’s also nonsense.

Beginerman there was a time when being supportive of the company you have invested in (ie BMN) was considered a good thing and this bb was full of research results and info.

There the trolls, miseries and others took over and people got attacked for being positive and having confidence in a company into which they had put their hard earned money. Comments just like the one you made.

Consequently those well informed investors have gone elsewhere taking there research and knowledge with them.

Some stupid people refer to them as rampers which to me tells me all I need to ‘now about these negative posters. So congratulations you have ended up with a bb that you deserve. Enjoy.

I am not in the telegram group and 8 regret those investors leaving this forum, but I don’t blame them for leaving the moaners and trolls behind. Sadly though we all lose.

Thanks Alfa.

People are right to be concerned about rising sea levels. This is a very real and dangerous threat to coastal and low lying communities, and therefore to all of us.

However to to put this issue in context re East London the worst prediction I have seen is a 1.35 m rise by 2021 (many predictions are less than this but of course the picture may worsen if we fail to act correctly) and up to 5 m by 2030.

These numbers of course may be catastrophic but don’t directly threaten the electrolyte plant. However we will all have much bigger problems by then if those forecasts prove to be true, the value of BMN shares by then being a long way down that list.

Again in the context of the electrolyte plant in the next decade or so this is a non issue.

“The truth hurts, get over it ... “ What a silly statement.

The truth is you have got it in for the BoD (in my opinion displaying very poor judgement on your part) and you will seize on anything to have a go at them.

I do not care whether the BoD buy or sell shares (check my posting history). It has nothing to do with the running of the business which is what I do care about, and they are doing very well on that score.

If it upsets you then that is your problem .., it’s certainly not mine.

Put a sock in it Disgruntled. If you had a bonus in shares and could meet the tax obligation by selling some that’s exactly what you would do.

Do please turn the record over.

A reminder of a few positives from the latest Q2 Update:

Group production figure of 886 mtV for Q2.
Vametco produced 278 mtV and 261 mtV for the months of May and June respectively.
Vanchem produced 293 mtV in Q2 2021 in line with Q1 2021 (Q1 2021: 293 mtV).
Vanchem is expected to maintain its current monthly production levels of approximately between 90 mtV to 100 mtV, through the support of feedstock from the upper seam at Vametco.
Group sales in Q2 2021 of 820 mtV.
On track to meet 2021 Group production guidance of between 3,400 mtV and 3,600 mtV.
The Group expects to maintain export volumes during Q3 2021.
The Upper Seam portion of the Vametco resource ("The Upper Seam Project") has been earmarked as a near-term source of feedstock for Vanchem to replace the ore stockpile acquired with the plant which is expected to deplete at the end of Q3 2021.

Note that Vametco in the very last data publicly available is not only achieving stable production but is EXCEEDING the latest monthly production guidance of 240mtV, and that Vanchem is not only achieving its production target but is doing it with a high level of consistency.

Good also to note that management have plans to maintain supplies of feedstock to Vanchem.

The critics here need to remember that buying existing plant, whilst much cheaper and quicker to production than building on greenfield sites, came with the maintenance issues of older plants. These have been problematic at Vametco and as a good management should do the issues have been dealt with.

All this against a background of falling V prices in 2019 and COVID in 2020 …. give the BoD a break.

Knuttie whether or not you take any notice of analysts is up to you. However one thing that most of them do is provide the evidence for their conclusions so that you or I, should we care to, can follow their logic and draw our own conclusions.

I don’t find unsubstantiated views by bb posters particularly helpful if no supporting evidence is given. I would like to think that I am consistent in that in most of my posts I try to give explanation or evidence to demonstrate why I hold a particular view.

So when a poster suggests the V price could drop to $30 kgV without offering any explanation I don’t find that very helpful and could be misleading. Remember that’s a drop of more than 25% when all the market evidence suggests upward pressure on the V price over the next 12 months or so.

Ninvestor I was questioning the logic behind your opinion, not your right to express it. I’m sorry if that annoys you but as you say this is a discussion board.

One thing though .... do you agree that all the evidence with regard to future V price is that there is going to be pressure on the price to rise? Or if you don’t agree then do please enlighten me as to what evidence I have missed that will in your opinion move the v price down over the next 12 months or so.

Saying past price movements is evidence just doesn’t cut it.

Just for balance FM said they were working hard to stabilise production at Vametco. The figures from May and June indicate that not only have they achieved that but at a rate higher than the target 240 mtV per month

With Vanchem having hit its target production I would say that production levels at the two plants are very encouraging, and hopefully production costs at Vametco will be lower with the higher production than in Q1.

Easy to get lost in a sea of negative comments when the most important part of the business (production of vanadium) is now performing well.

Ninvestor if you pay no attention to ‘expert’ opinion given by people that have better access to market data etc than you or I do, then why put up the statement “ it's so volatile, could drop to 30 as easily as go above 45 in my opinion.” After all if we are to ignore ‘experts’ then your opinion of V price must be even less reliable … so what is the point of giving it?

You can’t just pluck a statement out of thin air with no evidence to substantiate it. Apparently all the data available suggests strong demand for Vanadium in H2 2021 and into 2022. With tight supply then logically the V price should rise. I will stick with that unless you can provide hard evidence to the contrary. Don’t panic every time there is a small market readjustment like at present. Prices don’t usually go up in a straight line.

I know we are all frustrated with the share price but let’s not start making things up.

Cindercone after several years of being a very divisive poster you have begun to write some interesting posts. It’s taken you a long time to get here but good to see.

However you still have a massive chip on your shoulder about certain posters. Let’s be clear … you made yourself a target with your provocative posts. You were duly put in your place. If you continue to write silly comments like your 21.19 comment you will no doubt continue to be ‘put in your place’.

It is entirely up to you but I suggest you stop attacking a poster that has done so much to help keep Bushveld shareholders informed. Clearly you are capable of writing comments that people will want to read. Leave the childish comments inside your head please.

I welcome the supportive tone in your comments towards BMN. Don’t spoil it.

Clearly China is responsible for very significant CO2 emissions. In fact ranked number 1 for total CO2 emissions.

However before we get too superior about this it is surely more relevant to consider emissions per head. In the link below China is ranked 32nd behind countries such as USA, Canada, Australia, Germany, Japan, Russia, Ireland, Netherlands, Kazackhstan, South Korea and … yes even South Africa! The data is from 2018 but I hope the point is made.

UK does rather better, ranked 54th.

China is pushing hard to develop renewables and battery storage but it doesn’t happen overnight. If we want cheap products made in China their factories need power. During this growth period in their economy they are likely going to continue to use fossil fuels until the switch to renewables is complete … in fact the same as most countries around the world.

This not just China’s issue. It is an immediate and serious problem for every country and every global citizen. A very big challenge!!!

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/Carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita/

I wonder how many of you if in charge of a business where your bonus was decided by a formula would actually turn it down? My guess? Not one of you so stop being such hypocrites and move on.

No one has been able to make the case that the business is not progressing and I expect that to play a major part in determining bonuses … and rightly so.

Sorry Spedders but the evidence for human activity being a dominant influence on the current rapid rise in global atmospheric temperatures is overwhelming. That is why there is general agreement among the scientific community. Your opening sentence is completely wrong.

I would welcome any research you have done that contradicts the models linking warming to increasing CO2 levels. There is now widespread acceptance within the global scientific community of the link between climate change and atmospheric CO2 levels. There will always be sceptics but the evidence is now overwhelming.

Wyloe that is an interesting opinion but it does run counter to the evidence.

One thing that science has become very good at is data gathering. The data tells us that global average temperatures have increased by about 1C over the last 100 years. The question is just how does that compare with historical global temperature changes.

A useful comparison would be with the period following the last ice age which was at its peak about 18,000 years ago. At that time global average temperatures were about 4C or 5C cooler than today.

Over the next 8,000 years or so temperatures rose causing extensive melting of ice and a rise in sea level of about 100 m, reaching present sea level about 6,000 years ago. So the 4C or 5C rise in temperature that caused this warming and a dramatic rise in sea level could be equated to a rise of about 1/2C (half a degree C) per 1,000 years.

There is no argument that this rise was due to natural causes and interestingly CO2 concentrations over this period accurately track the temperature changes. It does demonstrate a link between CO2 levels and atmospheric temperature.

No doubt those that share your opinion would claim therefore that the current warming is due to natural processes. OK so exactly what are the natural causes that over the last 100 years have led to a rate of warming approximately 20 times faster than during the period following the last ice age (1C per 100 years v 0.05C per 100 years). Remember that we are very good at data gathering yet we cannot identify natural causes that have caused this very fast rate of warming.

At the same time CO2 within the atmosphere has risen quite sharply, much of this due to gases emitted during the Industrial Age and in particular the last 100 years. Once again we see the link between CO2 levels and atmospheric temperature, only this time the source of this rise in CO2 is human activity.

I respect your opinion as a climate change sceptic but I must point out that the huge amount of data now gathered and the models derived from this certainly point to increasing temperatures driven by rising levels of so called greenhouse gases.

You are correct to point out that atmospheric temperatures do vary over time. However the very big problem that the sceptics have to explain is the very rapid rise this time, unprecedented in previous warming periods, and the correlation between warming and CO2 levels. Any natural process powerful enough to drive warming at the pace we are now seeing would be very obvious and easily measurable. And yet none have been identified. At the same time science explains the warming as being linked to CO2 levels and the mechanisms are well understood.

(To be continued)

Thank you Cindercone. Appreciated.

I hope that today’s rise might be the beginning of a more positive period for all BMN shareholders. We need something to unite us and increasing value of our investments could do the trick.

It is a shame that there has been so much division on this bb. I look forward to BMN giving us all something to smile about. Everything that I know and understand about the company screams out for a share price rerate.

Cindercone you wrote a post about me on 23 July. I was going to ignore it but on reflection it is so full of inaccuracy that it needs to be dealt with. This is what you wrote:

“….. I can't think of a single post where Pdub has been attacked and insulted. The reason that he and Alfacomp are supposedly leaving is because they are frustrated at being unable to control the narrative in a certain direction. Personally, I have a lot of time for Pbub and enjoy his posts, but it's a public forum and people should be able to post whatever they want, whether you like it or not. If you don't like what someone posts, there is a filter button that works very well.
Some people need to grow up. BBN is perfectly happy to post here and continues to offer his invaluable knowledge. He doesn't tell anyone what to post, he accepts criticism of the company and doesn't try to influence opinion. Be like him.”

On the first sentence you are very wrong, but then why should you be aware of comments written about me, so I can understand your ignorance of the facts and will leave it at that.

As for why I am ‘supposedly leaving’ what I actually said was that ‘I need to think about whether to continue participating on this bb…. “ and “… I will keep this decision under review.” Not exactly the same as your comment.

More importantly are my reasons. You quite falsely said: “because they are frustrated at being unable to control the narrative in a certain direction.” There is not one ounce of truth in that statement! I clearly gave my reason and I repeat it below.

“I am going to concentrate on remaining positive in my battle with cancer. Frankly the depressing atmosphere at times on this bb makes that so much harder.”

In other words the negativity beginning to dominate this bb was distracting me from my own personal battle for which I have to be very positive or it’s over. I cannot allow that to happen. At no point have I given any reason for you to conclude that it was because I can’t control this bb. I wouldn’t want to! You clearly have not a clue what was going through my mind and at best you are completely wrong. And before you even think of a response try to imagine how you would face a terminal disease and what mental strength is required. Only then will you understand why I am removing as much negativity from my life as I can.

Don’t confuse my determination to challenge any false, misleading or unsubstantiated posts that may damage my investment with wanting to control the bb. If I write a post here I recognise anyone can challenge it. Likewise I have the right to challenge any other opinions expressed here. You suggest that if a reader doesn’t like the content of a post they should use filter button. Ok …. but then what is the point of a bb if not for informed debate? So that is not going to happen.

Finally I will grow up in my own time thank you, and I certainly don’t want to be like BBN (no disrespect) … I want to be who I am. I am proud of who I