Member Info for Pecten11

Sandy, if I've been more sceptical about BBPM itself, it's more to do with how AP sells it - it's always about the next rainbow, ignoring the fact that your getting wet right now - so many diversions and distractions to stretch the timelines out

Conceptually, re-opening a brownfield site, even an underground one can have merits, especially as both the copper and gold price are higher than the previous times it has closed down. However, commodity prices are just one (important) factor, the condition and size of the ore body remains are obviously crucial - that's one of the big Qs I've consistently had, is the amount of delineation drilling has always felt inadequate
Personally, if the Bod are confident of the ore body, more definition of resources would have created far better opportunities for non-bucket shop finance - afterall if the asset is really that good, how come the best finance they could get needed 200% collateral cover with a 10% coupon?

We've both made our own estimates re how much revenue they need to generate by May next year (or yet another can kicking refinace will be needed at shareholders expense) but never see the ramping brigade trying to actually come up with any figures of how much ore they need to mine to produce sufficient concentrate by then. To me, that curve feels steep, but would be more than happy to see logical POVs broken down

DJ777, also, btw VAST have said to ignore previously issued guidance in an RNS, just have 'forgotten' to update their website

Dj777, you've been around mining stocks for a long time, how much value is normally ascribed to measured resources compared to indicated or inferred - or even lower down the confidence scale, exploration targets?

Wouldn't you agree that the perceived value decreases the further down the confidence scale it goes?

And by the way, VAST doesnt currently have any reserves in the measured category - read the JORC itself for proof

Steward1, isnt your paranoia of needing to believe a conspiracy theory weakened by your posting history suggesting that your buy in point was around 1.475.
Just accept it was a bad call rather than trying to blame others

Steward1 '1st of all, I didn't say 'all' recipients so please don't spin my words.'

Wouldn't you agree that works both ways - after all my post said 'Atlas gone is good, now just got to flip the majority of those placing shares'
Note: majority

Steward1 'Credit where credit is due - I bow to your knowledge of what Atlas intentions were... I do wonder if that was down to some inside knowledge?? Have you sold lately?'

If I were a representative of Atlas, I'd be a happy bunny, as they've probably made best part if $10 M profit over the last few months - off the back of PIs buying their shares.
However, if you were an investor, you'd know your history if VAST and this bb - some of us have been around long before Atlas, although that means we've also seen previous relationships with convertible debt holders

Steward1 'he's made a big assumption that the recipients of placing shares want to sell at these prices (suits his agenda'

So you think all the recipients of placing shares are still going to hold?

Ah yes, that's from the same genius so said it wouldn't be funny if Atlas were actually buying shares.......

Or was that just to suit your agenda??

Magicali, based on Q1 results coming out at the start of May, Q2 results would be early August, but even VAST say they wont show much, so Q3 results in early November will be the ones to watch

Jarv, yes its Pis buying - am sure the recipients of the 460,000,000 placing shares are loving the ramping to let them unload at a nice profit

Atlas gone is good, now just got to flip the majority of those placing shares and it will be fascinating to see if/when the first warrant exercise is published

Steward1 'Wouldn't it be funny if they had started to buy!'

It would be absolutely hilarious and massively unlikely .

On a bb full of it, possibly the most ridiculous supposition ever dreamt of

FigLeaf 'taking into consideration the potential £200m assets we sit on,'

Two things - first, the word potential. Lots of things on AUM have had potential and then disappeared
Second - £200M assets- is that another figure plucked out of the air, or do you want to try and break down how its derived?

One thing I can predict though, is that neither you, nor the recent band of happy clappers will try to answer the second part.

dealer, if that's how you choose to self identify that's cool

Herts - there were 460,000,000 admitted to trying from the placing at 0.007 as well as however many Atlas/Arena have left at 0.0027, so in terms of overhang its North Face of the Eiger in scale - yes it can be climbed but casualties are a real possibility

Was going to say - in fact, we could all play a game and find anyone of his announcements that have actually been completed to schedule?

steward1 'I'm expecting that AP will not be slow in publishing any good news in the next few weeks/months.'

That's very true, historically AP has been very prompt about publishing/talking about good news, the delivery of those announcements is nearly always late - even the Mantis rigs were late compared to when they were first announced. - in fact, we could pl

I hope he does less talking but more actioning - let's see if Q3 figs stand up

Asimple- sorry to hear that

The underlying point of view re risk is valid - at least VAST have tried to mitigate against some of the risks with the remote loader and the mesh netting against stonfall, but fundamentally mining underground is always going to be risky and mitigation is just that, reducing risk but not eliminating it.

Mickey 'the big HNWI and insitutions know how cheap vast are'

How do you know? Have you a high personal net worth, or are you in an institution?

Or just licking another finger to stick in the air?

Griend, people could read your posting history (doesnt take long) and realise that your contributions are not worth one iota of consideration - a prime example of wasted time and energy imho

Griend, you really have no idea

8 would encourage anyone to read through Sandy's posts ( and you will find he and I have disagreed about a number of things, but generally in a civil manner) - there is far more balance in his posts than those who purely want to wave pom poms in their guise as cheerleaders

Mickey, as you knew another 460 million shares were being added, why do you think the two TR1s are so positive?

Those shares were going somewhere and we knew SwissToni were getting some of them, so dont really see the surprise