Member Info for RachT

EnuffRMbs - UFO, what a dubious co. that is / was. No doubt it's excellent corporate governance (LOL) inspired the infamous Dave Lenigas to promote it - that says all you need to know. Oh, and as it was such a well respected and highly regarded outfit (LOL again) RM saw an opening to work his usual magic and joined in for his share of a few dollars while the shareholder's value was being trashed.

I'm not sure why some poster think any company with the merest shred of dignity, honesty or record of good corporate governance would ever think about doing business with RM. I think Kobold are looking to get out, even if it costs them. I might be proved wrong of course but ultimately would Bill and Jeff want to be associated with a character like RM?

Trombone - if you dislike my posts you are free to not read and ignore them. Looking at many of your previous posts you have often referred to those posters that disagree with your narrative in an insulting manner. You big yourself up as all knowing and attempt to rubbish anyone not agreeing with your view. I've been around too long to be intimidated by inane threats by equally inane bullies.

Thanks again SS - I do appreciate the individual effort you put into researching your extensive knowledge and your generosity in posting - I'm learning all the time. I can't recall every stating that my knowledge is as extensive as both you and Ben seem to think that it is - I'll freely admit that it is comparatively limited in the REE domain. However, I still maintain that claims of 'spectacular' and 'world class' are stretching the facts. You may disagree, fine. I also think the comment of

'Whilst the Brazilian ionic rare earth projects have captured market interest, our results are comparable in grade, scale and metallurgy.......' is also somewhat misleading. It may apply to hard rock sources but as I posted recently it comes no where near the grades of the Uberaba stacks and the metallurgy of Uberaba and Phalaborwa seem (in my limited knowledge) to be potentially as easy (easier?) and possibly cheaper than COBR's. Or do you disagree?

I tend to put a lot of faith in the opinion of experts, for example the US gov.t has invested $50m in RBW and has delegates visit their site in Phalaborwa, that's a big plus in my opinion. I like to view bull and bear sides of an arguement and to learn of competitors - you seemed very dismissive of both RBW and PRE. You were unaware of the potential for the Uberaba and Phalaborwa stacks as you thought that all of RBW's reserve were in hard rock. Good luck with COBR - I'm sure it will come good for you but in the interests of balance I might just continue to post regarding COBR's competitors.

SS, thanks for reply. It's not me calling Brazil tier one I just googled 'what mining tier is Brazil'. You don't seem to consider news and information about strong competitors to be relevant to your investment case - I do and hence my posts. But each to their own. As I posted previously COBR came to my attention when it surged 40% on its spectacular news - from there I researched it and similar companies. Given that that was a relatively short time ago I'd like to think you and others are more knowdgable than I on the share of your primary focus (I can see that you are at least) - I probably can't add much that you don't already know, although having said that I've found plenty of info to help make my investment decisions. Oh, and I am no angel - that's for sure!

Jollifant - interesting theory you've created to fit your balanced opinion (lol) but once again erroneous I'm afraid. Keep trying, you might get something right eventually ;-)

SS - thanks again for reply. I don't agree with your impression of Brazil - you paint it like a wild west. It is a Tier One Mining Jurisdiction and companies working successfully there include big names such as AngloAmerican, Vale, Kinross and Wheaton.

I'm also not sure that the description you apply to RBW's reserves as being of 'hard rock' is accurate. Both of RBW's reserves are phosphogypsum stacks - think more like course powder. These are formed as a by-product from the production of phosphoric acid and is actually in liquid form initially. When it is deposited in settling lakes it dries and forms the enormous stacks. It is a simple matter of re-hydrating it, both to transport it and process it - comparable in both cost and expediency to COBR's tasks.

Ailean - thanks for confirming my suspicions. I thought it strange when another post earlier today advised dismissing any misgivings about previous BODs and give the current BOD a chance. Well are these not basically the same BOD (not including RE's short tenure of course) but now with less 'expert' colleagues (as they've been sacked)? The same BOD that over saw the value destruction of the last few years.

Trombone - not sure where you sourced your info regarding any holding I do or don't have in any company? But thanks for the tip :-)

Jollifant - not sure what the importance of todays price change is, or any short term price for that matter? The COBR sp dropped very quickly after the market had digested the news of their spectacular results - what inference can be drawn from that? Nothing.

SS - thanks again for your informative input and counter. However, Brasil is not a high risk jurisdiction - it's a Tier One mining jurisdiction and it now has several parties interested in REs. I cannot answer the other queries you pose but what caught my attention is the fact that Phalabora has enormous potential and it would seem that Uberaba has even greater potential - and is in a tier one mining jurisdiction. Like you I see the merits of both RBW and COBR (and Pensana and others) I'm not coming out on the side of one company or the other (I have a balanced view of both) and merely post the info. I've always thought that the more facts an investor has the better is their decision making.

Yes John Meyer - the very same chap that once touted JAY to be worth 40+ per share but all the while he was busy ramping JAY his co. (SP Angel) were selling the shares they held in JAY into the price spike he created - nice work if you can get away with it, after all poor chap needs a decent salary for his exemplary work.

Hey - don't shoot the messenger, just putting it out there. DYOR of course.

Another co. reporting concentrations and recovery rates that are far superior to COBR's. To re-cap COBR stated they had around 241ppm NdPr - RBW are today reporting that their latest survey shows they are sitting on between 1,116ppm and 1954ppm for NdPr at Uberaba, Brazil. Their stated recovery rate is also far superior to COBR's at between 31% and 65%. Certainly some very stiff competition for COBR.

Rainbow Rare Earths is pleased to announce the results of the mineralogy and hydrometallurgical test work recently carried out on phosphogypsum material from The Mosaic Company's ("Mosaic") Uberaba site in Brazil that is the subject of a memorandum of understanding ("MOU") between Rainbow and Mosaic.

As announced on 7 September 2023, Rainbow had assayed gypsum samples from different areas of the Mosaic stack, which were sent to SGS Laboratories in Lakefield, Canada for testing. The assays found to have the highest grade were those taken from the most recently deposited phosphogypsum material, which is the by-product of ongoing phosphoric acid production by Mosaic at the Uberaba site. This material demonstrated a grade of between 4,520 to 7,912ppm total rare earth oxides ("TREO"), with neodymium and praseodymium (together "NdPr") being 24.7% of the rare earths basket. The TREO grade thus being ca. 80% higher (based on current phosphogypsum material from the phosphoric acid plant at Uberaba) and the NdPr grade being ca. 50% higher than those at Phalaborwa. The Uberaba phosphogypsum stack has similar characteristics to Phalaborwa given that both stacks are based upon a hard rock carbonatite phosphate deposit. As such, the Uberaba material is amenable to direct acid leaching, which the testwork demonstrated can recover between 31% to 65% of the TREO.

Mineralogical evaluation of the leach residue carried out at SGS Laboratories in Lakefield, Canada, has revealed that 50% to 71% of the rare earth oxides are contained in monazite.

Due to mineralogy, a complementary route is being studied via hydrometallurgical and monazite concentration test work at Mosaic's lab in Brazil that will allow for increasing overall TREO recovery.

The phosphoric acid plant at Uberaba receives its phosphate rock feed from long life phosphate mines which offers the opportunity to recover rare earths from the current arisings of phosphogypsum from the phosphoric acid plant. The stack still represents a significant rare earths resource that can be addressed at a later date should the current arisings become the focus of the initial study.

LOL - you couldn't make it up! That smacks of incompetence - incompetence the big boys will just climb all over themselves to team up with, NOT. Expect more 'great' news about Dundas soon; looks like RM & his cronies are realising all their other schemes are doomed to failure and are desperate to rekindle any interest in JAY that they can. Probably big up Dundas again and try their usual tricks to con investors to part with their money. Now that they have a very very much reduced pool of experts (sacked them all) it's rather strange how it's so easy for the one or two left to discredit previous findings when it's convenient to do so. My guess is that Kobold are not going to drill & nobody wants to partner JAY - and RM knows it. Could be proved otherwise but why reinstate Dundas by using the feable excuse that they think shouldn't have used diamond drilling - weren't we told time and time again there is years and years of eroded material already to be scooped off the beach?

Ashton - Let's put my comment on the COBR thread in context - Jollifant stated -

'It's glaringly obvious that RachT has suddenly surfaced here to ramp his investment in Pensana.' I neither confirmed or denied any holding in PRE (although I can now see why you may have interpreted it that way) - I posted to clarify that he was wrong in his statement of my intent and wrong to refer to me as he. You may refer to me in whatever manner you wish :-) but FYI your comment 'RachT has claimed that the name is not Rachel' is also incorrect, I haven't said that.

In your reply to LWHL this morning you asked 'what weight of evidence'. Unfortunately your delusional behaviour means you are blinded to the past record of JAY, RM, RE etc etc. Blinded to facts. Blind to all their past promises and reassurances, blind to RM's track record of value destruction at several previous companies and his 'dodgy' dealings, blind to the destruction of shareholder value at JAY, blind to your own LARGE loss, blind to the enormous task ahead just to make sure this company even survives etc etc. Instead you continue hypothesising (as you seem to have done continually for the years in which your own investment gradual fell by around 97%) of various possibilities and outcomes and changes to strategies - the accuracy of your predictions is almost as poor as JAY's. You repeatedly re-inforce your arguement by issuing such comments as 'I know for a fact' or 'I have been advised by JAY' and have done so for most of the time that you have lost 97% of your investment. Does it never cross your mind that you are being taken for a ride? They can say whatever they like to you knowing that there is absolutely no comeback to them and they can be safe in the knowledge that you'll post whatever rubbish you're told - and probably embellish it with your own positive opinion. That's the truth but unfortunately you are incapable of seeing it. If I where a shorter of shares I would like to have shorted JAY for the entire period that you have been bigging it up.

Rach short for Rachel - what's with the 'he'

Troajan - you need to read the thread more thoroughly, seems maybe it is you making things up lol

1. ppm figures were from 'core drilling' at their main site - not surface sampling as you state

2. Ph level of acid used will make a huge difference to recovery rates

Ashton - as stated, I'm pleased for you that you have convinced yourself that you haven't made a loss - I do not agree with you at all

Ashton - so in your weird world you've not lost out on having around an extra 5.8m shares in your portfolio and are not down around £17k either - you live in cloud cookoo land. Your arguement and believe that anyone disagreeing with you is naive merely serves to reinforce my initial impressions when I first read this board - you are a muppet.

ChirpyCheep - touche lol

Ashton - if you've managed to convince yourself that you haven't made a loss then I'm pleased for you.

ChirpyCheep - I don't disclose holdings or dealings. I learnt long ago that people making such posts do so for their own benefit; either to support their own bullish opinion (and persuade others to do likewise) or looking for reassurance that they made the correct decision. I do not seek or need to do either. When making an investment decision I totally ignore any posts by retail investors stating that they hold X number of shares or that they've bought X number of shares; for ever buy there's a sell but sells rarely get posted about (eg, even Ashton doesn't inform of his sells). It's impossible to know if such posts are even genuine. I find it best to rely on the relevant facts - rather than be influenced by whatever any random retail investor posts about their holdings, or lack of.

Ashton – yes, you've made a loss. The fact you haven't yet sold merely indicates that the loss has yet to be realised. The worth of any item is what it can be exchanged for in the here and now, not what is might, should, could be worth. Using figures in previous post, to buy 200k JAY shares at 9p costs £18k – that holding now worth £600 – loss £17,400. Alternatively, had initial purchases not been made that £18k could now buy 6m shares instead of present holding of 200k – a loss of 5.8m shares to the portfolio, 5.8m shares that cannot be replaced without investing yet more money. So yes, you've made a loss.

Ashton – thank you for your responses to my comments – I was not expecting you not to reply until after any update from JAY but as you have I shall also take the opportunity to respond.

If an object that you own has dropped in value it's worth has reduced; you've made a loss, pure and simple. Trying to convince yourself otherwise is a fallacy.

You are correct, I do not know the exact amount of your loss but I can make a good guess. On the 20th September 2023 you posted, and I quote with your own use of uppercase emphasis –

'As a heavily invested shareholder (I hold a LARGE six-figure investment at an average price of just under 9p/share)'

In my post I suggested an average of 7.46p but your own post informs that your losses are even greater than I had first thought. Terms of 'heavily invested' and 'LARGE' are of course very subjective and six-figure could be anywhere between 100,000 and 999,999 – unless you were merely attempting to big up your position let's assume you hold at least somewhere in the bottom quartile of that range so say 200k shares (anything less is hardly a LARGE six-figure holding). I've assumed you meant shares (rather than £GB). So your loss could be around £17,400, a c. 97% loss. I don't expect you to confirm or deny these figures. In your many subsequent bullish posts I can see no post advising that you have reduced your core holding. Neither can I find any posts advising anyone that you have sold any of your shares (core holding or smaller trading holding) – strange that, you promote JAY constantly yet also trade it on the quiet. Well done on any money you've made on your trades but the larger core holding is down 97% - that has to increase 30 fold for you to recover any loss. As the odds of any junior mining company ever making profit are miniscule and of those that do the vast majority are over budget and delayed I think the chances of that are very small indeed.

The value of any holding in Met1 that JAY holds has also fallen by 80% and that is tied up until December 2025. So the sale of assets is going to be JAY's saviour? I think not. JAY will need placing after placing and then go bust. If they are lucky enough to gain a partner it isn't likely to be on terms favourable to existing sharholders.

Let's have a look at some of Rod's other schemes and the value destruction for shareholders (from peaks created by initial ramp and euphoria) -

Medussa – 100% loss

Anvil Mining – 100% loss

Kingrose – >95% loss

Greenland Minerals – >95% loss

Elemental minerals – >95% loss

APOL - >95% loss

TMOR – hmmm, very very questionable antics but too short a period to gauge.

Good luck with your investment strategy but personally I think you'll have to come to terms with your LARGE loss.

Ashton - thank you for your reply. I expected nothing less; an eloquent lengthy reply that does not acknowledge any misplaced loyalty (to JAY) nor any recognition of the multiple inaccurate predictions that you have previously offered in support of your belief in JAY. As per many of your replies on this board you are true to form and instead attempt to deflect attention away from your failures and on to whom so ever may question your unswerving dedication to JAY, and therefore of Rod M. Now there's a cowboy if ever there was one, but hey, let's gloss over his appalling track record of failed promises, dates, targets (for several companies under his past tenure) and his total disregard for shareholders - because to do otherwise would be contrary to your narrative.

I look forward to your next update and predictions for JAY.

Torreaguas - thank you for your concern. Rest assured that in my 40+ years of investing (with a moderate degree of success) I learnt many many years ago not to rely on chat board posters for sound investment advice. Boards are a necessary read to get a feel for the vibes and the occasional snippet of info but beyond that they are pretty much useless; they are primarily the sounding board for the thoughts of perpetual bulls. I use Ashton as an example - still convinced that JAY is a winner despite the SP falling >96% since their first post on this thread.

Ashton - thanks for your reply but I can see no benefit of entering into any discussion with you regarding JAY - your many previous posts only serve to illustrate that what ever JAY do (or don't do) you will try to put a positive spin to it. You certainly seem to know JAY as well, or better, than anyone else here and you twist that knowledge to support your undying believe in JAY. Sorry, but your conduct is of someone showing a delusional view of a company and not one that can be relied upon to make sound investment decisions.