Member Info for Pecten11

I agree that JC still has the will to find something special, but, and I know this sounds negative, I don’t understand how BOD haven’t had to raise some more cash

Hugop, loads of AIM tiddlers try to sound impressive with big numbers, but out of those tonnes you quoted, how much is actually in the measured category?i.e. has decent levels of confidence in it actually existing ?

It’s like oilers stating that they are sitting on billions of barrels but the actually geological chance of success is shockingly poor

The drilling campaign last year that was needed to get an extension to the license at Baita should have improved the definition of the resource (to some degree) but as shareholders we’ve been told nowt

So, $1M for these lots plus a suggested $3M ish for the remaining better quality stones

Better than nothing but not what the fantasists wanted others to believe, enough to keep the carat(!) dangling..,

Disco-

Around 4 paragraphs down in the body of the 31st Aug RNS

Funding equity sub title

Post period end - the C&P table below has obviously lost some of the formatting

£ $ Shares issued Issued to

2,012,000 2,677,586 503,000,000 Warrants exercised by investors

212,000 287,083 60,571,428 Subscription by investor

4,500,000 6,050,229 1,825,396,824 Placing with investors

6,724,000 9,014,898 2,388,968,252

If that’s the case, I stand corrected

So from your reading of the accounts, with Baita being on C&M, the only obvious increase in costs over the last six months can be diamond extraction and beneficiation- surely that can’t be $9M? Even if you accepted prob $1.8 to 2.3 for repayment of APs loan plus accumulated other director loans?

Asi ‘If you had read the audited accounts you would have seen why it was essential for that placing to be completed when it was. Without it, the accounts would not have been approved.’

You know better than that.

Accounts were upto year end April 25. Not including the last placing $9M has been ‘raised’ post period end

Mouse, did you actually read the article, the only crossover is the general diamond market and anyone who had taken a punt on VAST but wasn’t aware of the recent marker sentiment gets what they deserve, but it has no direct relevence to the TAGS lots in Dubai

As with any auction some lots sell, some don’t, but your article was in relation to a short notice, massively higher value auction and said they didn’t sell at a price that would have destabilised the market, not that they couldn’t sell

Asi, you know I’m not APs biggest fan, but even I think this current drop is overdone. Cash raised post period end $9M plus the recent placing will have taken pressure off for a while imo

I’m more interested in when/if the Manaila exploitation license review is granted

Hubstar as you’ve very obviously flip-flopped from your previous ramping position, can we all take it you’ve now sold - and now opened a short position?

Your choice to do so, but would explain the change in behaviour?

And if it is just based on your reading of an article over the weekend re the diamond market, how much are you beating yourself up for doing poor research?

Asi, thanks for the reply

I note that you say estimated price per carat on lots you’ve seen - is that an auction guide price or your estimate of what those lots would have been worth?

Does the auction display the value of winning bids per lot or does it say sold or reserve not met?

Just trying to get a feel of the strength or otherwise of the market, especially because I thought the current average boart value would have been much lower

A new offtake deal, with likely upfront payment would be based around the current copper price - when the Mercuria deal was done copper was around a third lower - that increase could make Baita profitable

Depending on how you look at it, AP has either been very unlucky ( having to do the re-org at Baita during a steep copper price rise and getting the historical parcel in his hands during diamond price weakness) or he’s just been incompetent operationally and managerially

Both things could be true of course…

Asi, while I appreciate there is much we still don’t know, you’ve been tracking the parcels that have actually sold at tender and what the description/classification was from the catalogue, would a $100, $40, $2 per carat split for Vasts packages, not inc. the remaining ‘better’ stones seem about right in comparison ?

Less the 20% royalty / fee

(if they sell that is - from what you’ve posted it sounds like many lots have had to be relisted, which may also be one of the reasons why the other potential funding sources have been mentioned due to timing)

Someone playing games

Amy ‘But the one thing i do know is that they are worth multiples of current Mcap when fully sold.’

No, you believe, you hope, you pray but you do not know

Do you think AP should try a JV with a firm that makes special straws used for clutching at….

RachelsDad, ‘The Company should be having millions of pounds arriving in the Bank Account very soon.’

Probably so, but it won’t be there long cos all of it / a lot of it (nobody’s knows yet) will be straight back out to pay off outstanding debt

StMartins, thanks for that very considered and enlightening critique, I’m sure that analysis will sway people’s minds

That’s not independent disco, he’s a punter like everyone else, not employed as an official analyst

Writers a blog as a ramp rather than posting on the boards, then everyone who agrees with his POV thinks he a genius

Muck ‘ Back in Jan AP lent €500k. We were told “ Vast Resources plc, the AIM-listed mining company, is pleased to announce that, whilst continuing to finalise its various funding options as previously announced, the Company has accepted an interest free, unsecured loan of €500,000 from its Chief Executive Officer, Andrew Prelea, repayable when the Company finalises funding and can afford to do so. The loan will be applied towards the Company’s general working capital requirements.”’

Yes, I also spotted the bland line in the accounts that suggests that AP has had the majority of any loans repaid - some might say, he’s entitled to it, but how can it be considered ‘material information’ when the loan is offered, but not material when it is repaid?

Tbf, he (and those that approve the wording) has been brilliant in the wording of RNS to never actually lie, but the years of being conveniently vague and avoiding specifics mean that the only people who trust him are those who benefit from the ongoing two tranche placings - those I’d hoped might come to an end when a better NOMAD was appointed, but sadly, Strand Hanson haven’t intervened

As all the recent ones have been within existing approvals for issuing shares, there is no reason why the shares are issues in two tranches unless people who are invited to the first tranche benefit from the process to the detriment of others

Didn’t your post say RNSd and RNSs are scrutinised????

Interviews - well, not so much

Like I said, your not great with facts…