Member Info for PuzzledPete

This share isn't yours Mr Profit me old Jock. Neither is this board.

We don't need to Mr Kammi. Our evidence is everywhere, as well as concisely set out here. But for some strange, no doubt psychological as well as mental, reason, you and your chums just don't want to know it. Or maybe you just don't understand it.

But as they say - horses to water etc - and pearls before swine - might have something to do with it .

Allo Allo Allo ! So wot do we ave ere ? Someone think expiry of the Jan 11's means no more churning or something ? The warrants aren't about churning They're about enormous dilution in exchange for peanuts. Even if the remaining ones are all executed right now, Mast will get just short of £5 million cash which will just about get it to a neutral cash position. But issued shares will be over 400 million.

The lemmings don't seem to understand what that means for the share price.

Spike will collapse again just like all those before. Probably on Monday. Scramble out first if you can.

Don't forget Buzz. When the price reaches zero, you'll be able to buy an unlimited amount. Got to be good.

Indeed - all the performance information is out there NMH21. It shows at the year end Mast will have had negative cash . You only have to read back on here where its been worked out (unless deleted by the fraudulent rampers). And if PK says 'he does have cash' , it will only be because he is including Pyebridge's 'revenue' before it pays its 70% gas bill.

Today is the last day he can get £4m or so from the expiring cash warrants - if a share price above 4p encourages holders to execute and sell for a tiny margin. Maybe a last gasp 'remarkable' claim by you know who ?

Quite ! Shows what a nonsense this share is.

There was someone similar to Buzz invested in Kibo when it was obviously becoming a dog, who invested the whole of his £500,000 pension to buy a declarable stake - added to all the way down 'to reduce his average', until he couldn't buy any more when it reached zero.

Continued 3)

Kibo, Krugel, and Venter should never have been allowed to raise money from the gullible. The fca was warned about holes in Mast's 2021 and 2025 prospectuses but let it through because on the practically unregulated 'Standard' market. Nevertheless it has a lot to answer for, added to with the near-fraudulent warrants scheme which some on here don't even realise has already decimated their share of Mast by over 90%. If it had fully succeeded they would have been decimated by an eye-watering 97%.

As for ACF, its 'research' bears no relationship to reality. It fails to allow for the SPV structure, fails to address the balance sheet hole - just 'assumes' Mast will 'meet' its 300MW 'target with no explanation how or at what cost and where funding will come from. In the process it omits from its 'value' its own forecast that Mast will have built up over £80m in debt before getting to 300MW, with no explanation how it will be met. On top it assumes profitability for its assumed plants 45% more than has ever been achieved in Pyebridge's best month.

There are too many other schoolboy howlers to describe. Except that every single one of ACF's previous 'share value ranges' in reports on Kibo, EUA, and earlier for Mast - all paid for by Krugel or associates - ended up with share prices even below before its ramping.

Sunday Roast is equally clueless. Its presenters have no investment qualifications or experience. They are stooges taking money for allowing Krugel - unchallenged - to spout his 'remarkable' Walter Mitty fantasies, and economies with the truth about Mast's financial structure.

Continued2)

That is, unless it raises more and more cash from shareholders - who will soon dry up on realising they are pouring into a bottomless pit. (Just as its parent Kibo with Krugel as its CFO did before going bust)

No competent business would invest others money in those circumstances. It's why all Masts's more than 600 competitors (who Krugel has never mentioned even in his prospectuses) are not listed companies but are privately backed by large groups who don't have to borrow so ruinously and give away 75% of their equity shares. The only other listed such company, Plutus Powergen, went bust in 2020 for the same basic reason.

In fact Krugel and his partner Venter seem to have got into this peaker business by accident while at the equally clueless Kibo (now bust) - thinking they'd got a bargain - and a chance for a 'business' keeping them in cigars - when they acquired the Bordersley project some 7 years ago (seemingly off a Dell-Boys' barrow) - which is still not funded and only partly built. For Bordersley they tried to get Kibo and then Mast's shareholders to buy it from them for £5 million, (and CEO Coetzee tried to say it was 'worth' £15 million) before it was written down to nil after a year in Krugel's hands. That shows their business competence, except that they never paid back the £5 million to the Kibo shareholders' they'd fleeced.

Its why Krugel is a Walter Mitty with no idea how his 'business schemes and 'partnerships' can ever work financially. Its why every single one of the six 'partners' he has trumpeted, since listing at a grotesquely exaggerated (by manipulating the share capital and exaggerating Bordersley's value) £20m market value in 20211 - which lost 90% in only one year - has quietly walked away having looked at the books. That's except the two well-known distress 'death spiral' lenders, Riverfort and Sanderson, who early on were imprudent enough to think they could profit from 'helping' Mast. Both have now lost eye-watering sums and are locked in, but look as though trying to walk away (just as did Mast's long term broker Novum a few months ago - with no announcement as would a reputable company)

Its also why Mast, if it is rescued in the next few months by naïve private investors putting up for yet another share issue, will be lucky not to go the same way as Enron - which hid from investors that it used SPV's which it didn't wholly own, and so eventually couldn't pay its own bills and went bust. And also like Kibo, which also didn't explain honestly to investors what a ruinous financial structure it was relying on.

Mast already looks well down the same path. So expect a 2026 even more 'remarkable' than 2025.

And Why ACF 'research' hasn't the slightest clue.

1) Because Mast has no money (the Dec year end report will show it is still badly insolvent - the warrants scheme having failed) it has to use SPV's ('Special Purpose Vehicles' - legally and financially separate companies even if 100% owned) financed overwhelmingly by outsiders who will take the majority of the SPV's profits leaving only a small residue if lucky to keep Mast afloat. PK has never made this clear to investors in any of his podcasts and prospectuses - in fact has left them with the impression that the share they are invested in - Mast plc - gets the generators' revenue when in fact it doesn't at all.

Hindlip is the template whereby an outside funder (Powertree in its case) funds practically the whole cost and takes the overwhelming proportion of profits. (Although it is truly 'remarkable' that Powertree has gone very quiet about funding any more of Mast's schemes)

Pyebridge is the only 100% owned plant (and maybe Bordersley if it gets built without outside funding which is unlikely) but still owes £2 million to Riverfort repayable by 2029. So with about £600,000 annual profit it will generate practically nothing for Mast after repayments until after 2029, when Mast's current 166m shares will earn only 0.3-0.6p each. It is not clear when the c £400,000 pa capacity market income will be included, but it would come fully through to Mast, helping a little but worth only 0.25 p per share

Hindlip at 7.1MW is relatively cheap at £5.5m to build (plus fees to buy the site and early work) to meet which it has to borrow £4.5m at 10% from Powertree, who also puts up £0.5m for 75% of the shares, leaving Mast to put up only 25% - with Powertree in full control.

On 7.1 MW Hindlip will make about £2.1m annual revenue worth about £600,000 profit if lucky, although capacity payments will earn another £450,000 annually.

But to repay the loan over the usual 8 years will take £840,000 pa. So at best with capacity payments Mast will get 25% of a miniscule £200,000 annual surplus.

For further similar plants capacity payments can't be guaranteed and have to be bid for against over 500 competitors so without them Mast will get nothing for the first 8 years but will clock up a 25% share of losses.

That is going to apply for all future plants - and means Masts' 'Business Model' doesn't make sense and never has - because it hasn't the capital to invest in an asset which at best is thought should only earn 15% annually (Pyebridge only some 10% at present) before depreciating to nothing over 15 -20 years, and has to borrow at 10%. It means there is no margin over for error in a notoriously volatile sector and too little to repay even the £170,000 Mast has had to invest 'up front'. It also means Mast has little to no income to meet its own costs during the eight years the plants' loans are being repaid, and not enough even to put up the amount needed to buy a 25% share of fur

Not a single institution !

(Do you know what an 'institution' is Mr Buzzer ?)

Do you really think BHP, NEM et al haven't seen how the fs is looking ? Of course they have.

So do tell us, Fellwanderer' how much per Met1 share any rise in Cleantech will be worth.

BobsB - this is now a trading share. The sensible see that Mast hasn't got a viable business model - just like its parent Kibo who went bust - and they've probably all got out by now. But the rampers will keep trying from this level and might even push up to the 10's. But reality will strike. Either when the full report and accounts in c April shows Mast is still insolvent and desperately needs The £4 million from the remaining cash warrants, or will persuade enough new mugs to put it up instead via a new cash raise try - at below 4p. So a short term punt maybe. But take any profit.. I can't see even a medium term, future for Mast. and the chance of anyone taking it over is zero. It hasn't got anything worth having.

These will be reposted soon. LSE needs to be informed that mine. and a few others posters' on here, are the only opinions and news, professionally analysed and entirely based on Mast's own published info but buried in the small print which, as a chartered accountant PK is obliged to provide in the full reports and accounts if not to be disbarred. However, his own podcasts and spin aimed at private investors can be easily shown to have always given (obviously deliberately) a completely different and much rosier picture than all the information shows - but to understand needs knowledge of accounting and share analysis which it seems few possess. No competent, authorised, qualified analyst or broker (even Masts own broker) has published anything on Mast to counterract the spin or the false picture being promulgated. (ACF 'research' is not a broker, has no serious investment analysis qualifications, has published seriously misleading and exaggerated 'targets' on other companies connected with Mast, and is not authorised or regulated by the fca to publish investment forecasts or reccomendations|) If LSE allows the obviously unqualified to have factual posts deleted, and ignores that even some broker platforms say beware of a possible scam, it is treading a dangerous path.

Bad Luck Mr NoCanDo. Like other Pete I 'm seeing this through because a few more astute than you might be saved from a bitter end.

In any case, to paraphrase Harris in 'Three Men in a Boat', I like stupidity. I can sit and watch it all day.

Its more at the mercy of its creditors Sham. No income. No money. Estimated £4 million net debts. No chance of warrants above 4p to enable more cash. No chance of 'partners' signing up with a bust outfit with no successful track record. But Walter Mitty will keep trumpeting as if they will. He might even persuade remaining mugs to cough up again - at lower and lower share price - on promise they might. Tears will be deferred but not stopped.

Sorry. Should have been £1.6million. Rest is the same

Quite Amin. Year's t/o looks like £1. Gross margin is less than 30%. Pyebridge owes £2million to Riverfort. Mast has no income and is insolvent. Not only should it not be listed. It should never have been listed and the fca was warned as much. It was brought to market by a pair of chancers at a fraudulently inflated valuation. Rampers on here don't even seem to have looked at the history and its origins.

He's been warning you, correctly, why to avoid this junk company. Any more objections ? Or are you deliberately trying to deter him, and to dishonestly ramp for your own ends ?