Member Info for raaydaar

What will happen to PREMs value if production doesn't start by November or cannot produce 900 tonnes SC6 in November?

The unknowns are just trades executed at the mid price between the bid and ask where the LSE algorithm is unable to allocate it to a buy or sell

Just had an email from the company answering some of my recent questions. Company are working hard and will be releasing a substantive update soon.

Martinigirl you've pretty much hit the nail right on the head. We're all frustrated with the board right now and like you I've also been refused a conversation with GS. I think that they're making a big mistake with this new communications strategy, they seem to have forgotten that we as shareholders own the company and as much as a pain in the behind it is they should welcome the opportunity to speak with shareholders and understand how they believe the company are progressing. When the interims are published I'm expecting to see some decent numbers which should wake the market up to the opportunity that exists here, that said we will not be attracting institutional investors whilst the mcap is at current levels. I agree that the SP is where it is due to boredom and frustration with other opportunities elsewhere and GS has now got to accept that this communication strategy isn't working and they need to change direction. I'm still happy with my investment here (I sold to 3% minus 1 share in protest at the new comms strategy) and when things change on the comms front I'll be posting another TR1.

There are no institutions buying. Canmax didn't want the placing, they're waiting for George to fail. No production by 1st November equals a $1.5 million payment to Canmax, money that GR will have to raise as they won't be taking PREM shares. Add to that the additional cash he'll need to raise to keep the lights on then PREM is gonna be in real trouble, what's left of the 5bn shares after the current placing, loan repayment and contractor payments will not last long especially if (when) the deadlines continue to be missed.

George has got around 4 months left to deliver after which PREM becomes insolvent

Highly positive RNS, getting the right people in the right positions at the right time, cutting down the overheads ready for the next move. Shows the market that Lorna knows who she wants to take with her for the next part of the HE1 journey.

The 2 contain similar reliance on failure / breakdown of equipment and PREM like the defendant on this case are relying kn this element to argue that a state of FM exists.

The judge in the case had to decide if:

After supply was resumed, did the force majeure clauses in the Contract apply so as to exempt the Defendant from liability for the non- or short supply of concrete between 18 November 2004 and 5 April 2005?

the Judge held that the force majeure clauses applied to justify non- or short supply due to shortage of raw materials, but DID NOT exempt the Defendant from liability arising from unforeseen plant breakdowns.

Good afternoon Acker,

PREM are relying on 2 parts of section 12.1 of the offtake agreement as a cause for FM:

(viii) disruption or breakdown of storage plants, terminals, equipment, machinery, or other facilities, which are not in the ordinary course of business.

(vii) Shortages, failure, unavailability, or inability to obtain machinery, materials, supplies, plant or equipment, water, fuel, transportation or power, which are not in the ordinary course of business.

In RDC Concrete Pte Ltd v Sato Kogyo (S) Pte Ltd and Another Appeal SGCA 39

The defendant relied on Clause J of their agreed contract for a state of FM, that clause stated:.

In the event of any circumstance constituting Force Majeure, which is defined as act of God, or due to any cause beyond The Supplier’s control, such as market raw material shortages, unforeseen plant breakdowns or labour disputes, the duty of the affected party to perform its obligations shall be suspended or limited until such circumstance ceases. In any event, The Supplier shall not be liable in any way for loss or damage arising directly or indirectly through or in consequence of such events or happenings.

The 2 contain similar

I have cited the case previously, the fanboys dismissed it as irrelevant

Acker,

"The first step to assess whether–and how–force majeure applies to any particular contract is to ascertain the law of the country (state) which governs the contract"

Singapore law applies and precedent exists

Acker, as a rebuttal the Singapore precedent contract included a clause for failure of plant and machinery, the court dismissed it.

Jonjo what new offtaker would this be? I haven't read any rns confirming that a new offtake agreement has been reached? Canmax have first refusal on any future placing to maintain their % holding and the offtake agreement. Would another company really come in and stump up close to $40 million to pay off canmax? That's gonna be one heck of a placing. Canmax get 3 billion shares to maintain their %, how many are going to the alleged new party? They're gonna want at least 10% and a seat on the board. That's a mighty big number and it's a whole lot bigger than the 4 bn George wanted before.

Once again the fanboys spouting made up nonsense.

Jonjo there you have it, why indeed waste time debating with me when you cannot offer a reasoned argument against what i say. By the way I'm not paid for anything I say here, I have a day job which pays much better than anything I could potentially earn from arguing with the PREM fanboy fans. I merely take the time to post my thoughts and arguments here in what may well be vain attempt to rehabilitate those indoctrinated into the PREM cult

Acker, please do take the time, let's debate! You previously countered my assertion that GR would sell shares with a claim that that would not be the case and he would use his shares as collateral.

That post want incorrect and do date I don't see many, if any of my posts as being incorrect.

I'll gladly take the time to debate, perhaps you can't be bothered because you can't actually cannot and merely hint at a point of contradiction.

Jonjo, I've previously posted, the link to the full judgement in Singapore for the legal precedent that ruled force majeure cannot exist for failures of plant or machinery. A court would without doubt award summary judgement in Canmax favour on the basis of that legal precedent. Its all there in black and white for everyone to read. It cost the company ghat claimed FM something to the tune of $5m as a penalty plus other costs if I remember rightly.

Can PREM afford another $5million on top of the repayment and interest? How big a placing would that need to be?

Mrnewbie the debate, as any debate is, is about arguing an opposing viewpoint you should try it rather than name calling. If you're confident in your investment, prove to me why I'm wrong in my assertions, I'm happy to be corrected on anything I've said. Change my point of view!

Wolframite, as you'd expect I got booted from the telegramp group for expressing a more realistic viewpoint as have many others

You've hit the nail right on the head there Johnnypc, unfortunately the fanboys have managed to persuade some to invest here far more than they could afford to lose with devastating consequences. Hence the need to be aware that there is a negative side to investing in PREM. If the fanboys engaged in the debate rather than name calling then people would have a far more balanced risk view. I'm more than happy to debate anything I've stated so far against an opposite view

Wolframite, the amount of shares I hold in prem is irrelevant be it 0, 1, 10 or 1 billion, I hold less than some and more than others I'm entitled to my opinion and I'm sharing it

Johnnypc if you feel the need to "save" people on other boards by all means go ahead, I'm sure that those boards also need some balance rather than a purely positive spin. I for one would welcome an outside view on any of my investments and provide a viewpoint I hadn't considered that would certainly help with my decision making process and risk management.