Member Info for RachT2

Satnight

Indeed — that’s broadly how I've envisaged it playing out.

Most likely a scenario where MarchGL is funded as required, with capital introduced in stages — effectively a series of “private placings” from the so-called “big hitters” as and when funds are needed. So the cash balance at MarchGL always remains minimal.

On that basis, the remaining GNLD trust balance is unlikely to be called upon in the near term, other than to cover ongoing corporate and day-to-day costs.

All IMHO, of course.

Satnight

Thanks — and for the 4x posts 😃 But one would have done.

Apologies if I wasn’t clear earlier — let me try a different angle.

The “big hitters” behind MarchGL have committed to funding the first two drills, but it’s highly unlikely those funds would be sitting idly in a MarchGL bank account today. More realistically, capital would be deployed as and when required. Most would probably do the same.

Which brings us to the figures referenced on page 164. Hopefully, those numbers are not indicative of the actual funding capacity behind MarchGL. If they were, then clearly the drilling programme would be in question. As it stands, the (historical/unaudited) figures show assets of less than ~$1.5m as at 30 September 2025 — which, on the face of it, doesn’t come remotely close to the funds required / committed.

It’s difficult to reconcile that with the progress made to date. One would assume that the SPAC wouldn’t have advanced this far — nor that parties such as Merus Global Investments and Decagon Asset Management would have been involved — without carrying out appropriate due diligence on MarchGL’s financial backing and the credibility of those providing it.

All IMHO, of course.

Satnight

With respect, no you haven't.

You've posted PELI / GNLD details - nothing in that document relates to MarchGL's funding / balance sheet.

As I've stated MarchGL is a private entity.

Silverfoxd / satnight

There's an awful lot of confusion amongst the “experts” on this board. But you are both correct to question funding.

Here's the reality - whatever the ramping crew might say.

No one has visibility on the MarchGL balance sheet — it’s effectively a private entity. Yes, it has committed to funding the first two drills, but there’s no publicly available proof that it has such funds at this stage. To be clear, I’m not suggesting those funds won’t materialise — just that, until invoices are actually paid, none of us can say with certainty what capital is readily available to MarchGL.

The same principle applies to USFM. It has committed to drilling at Disko, but again, there’s no transparency on funding. Until activity is demonstrably financed, it ultimately comes down to taking both commitments on trust. Quite a leap of faith.

As for the ~$86m — that related to the potential original SPAC trust value, ASSUMING MINIMAL REDEMPTIONS. As we now know, that scenario didn’t play out.

With the scale of redemptions, the remaining trust balance looks to be closer to ~$12m.

In the near term, that may not be critical if MarchGL does actually produce the necessary cash to fully fund the first two drills, as we all hope and expect.

However, the bigger question is what comes next. Exploration programmes rarely stop at two wells, and that original trust capital would likely have been earmarked for follow-on activity.

With the trust now significantly reduced, any additional drilling or wider exploration will presumably require alternative funding — whether that’s debt, equity raises, or further capital injections from partners as and when required. And in that context, ~$12m doesn’t go very far.

In the near term though the only purpose of that $12m is to keep the lights on at GNLD.

As with all my posts — past, present and future — this is IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. Please DYOR before making any investment decisions.

Apologies - typo in last post, section should read -

not necessarily within, or including, 80M.

Interesting article — thanks Hazelbank.

The final paragraph echoes a point I’ve been making for some time:

“Greenland Energy Company will be judged first on Jameson Land… the wider significance of the listing may emerge later… as part of a broader Arctic industrial story…”

In other words, JL looks like the starting point. If the bigger picture does materialise, it sits at the GLND level — not necessarily within,more including, 80M.

Which brings me to valuation. I struggle with the idea that 80M equates to ~30% of GLND — how can it? At best, you might argue it reflects a current interest in JL, but even that comes with caveats. GNLD appears to have options to acquire that stake on favourable terms, irrespective of what the initial drilling reveals. If that’s the case, it arguably places a ceiling on the longer-term value attributable to 80M from JL alone. Happy to hear any reasoned counterpoints.

Looking further ahead, if GLND does evolve into a broader Arctic vehicle — spanning power, minerals, infrastructure, etc. — it’s not apparent that 80M shareholders would be likely to participate in that upside. Those opportunities would presumably sit within GLND itself.

And let’s be realistic — the parties behind GLND appear commercially astute. It’s difficult to see why they would dilute their own position to benefit minority interests elsewhere if they don’t need to.

As with all my posts — past, present and future — this is IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. Please DYOR before making any investment decisions.

Cybertron

Thanks for your courteous, pleasant and intellectual reply. I see you don't keep your pleasant nature to just this board - oh no, you spread your intolerant moronic dross pretty much wherever you are confronted with an opinion that differs from your own - perfectly highlights your level of intelligence. And I'm the idiot. LOL.

Ah well, yet another pointless specimen filtered.

Have a nice day.

All IMHO, of course.

Sharepoint

From here, I can see it going one of two ways in the near term.

On the one hand, the significantly reduced float could create a supply squeeze and drive a sharp move upwards. On the other, the lack of PIPE support and the scale of redemptions could weigh on sentiment and lead to downside pressure. I’d say both outcomes are entirely plausible - but I'd give the former a slight lead if I had to pick one over the other.

Either way, I’m content having taken profit. Experience has taught me that being greedy rarely ends well.

Good luck if you are holding.

IMHO only. DYOR.

Ouch.

In a previous filing, PELI indicated a trust value of approximately $87.8m. At $10.00 per share, that implies roughly 8.78m publicly held shares.

Fast forward to the latest update and redemptions have been, to put it mildly, substantial — just over 7.56m shares redeemed at $10.28, equating to circa $77.4m being taken out of the trust.

The net result is that the trust has been reduced by in the region of 85–90%, leaving only a relatively small residual balance.

Make of that what you will, but it does rather challenge the narrative that “big instos” were lining up to participate. On the contrary, a large proportion of holders have chosen to redeem at a modest premium rather than remain invested through to listing.

One could reasonably infer that, if those holders were expecting a meaningful uplift post-float, they might have stayed in. Instead, many have opted to take the ~$10.28 and exit.

That’s not to say there won’t be volatility or even a bounce on listing — SPACs can behave unpredictably — but the redemption data suggests that a significant majority of existing holders were not sufficiently convinced to stick around.

It’s also worth considering the funding position post-close. While MarchGL is expected to cover the cost of the initial two drills, once that commitment is met there appears to be limited capital remaining in the kitty to support further drilling or broader exploration activity — particularly in the absence of any PIPE funding. That potentially leaves the company reliant on future raises or other financing to progress beyond the initial phase.

Hopefully, readers can now better understand why some of us have been consistently urging a degree of caution.

I'm glad to have recently taken the remainder of my profit.

As with all my posts — past, present and future — this is IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. Please DYOR before making any investment decisions.

Ok, so I've had no response from LSE thus far. I'll assume my posts were removed in error. Today's events really do highlight the comedy value of certain posters offerings. I've removed the individual names - but you can guess who they are

A light-hearted look at today’s “comedy greats” on the BB — with a few observations. My thanks to all below, who (purely coincidentally I’m sure) seem to post identical material across multiple platforms. Fancy that. 😉

1

“WATCH HOW THIS JUMPS UP INTO CLOSE READY FOR TOMORROW .. ROCKET ..”

— Oh dear.

“...as news travels institutions will take their positions,”

— Hilarious. I was under the impression PIs tend to be last to the party, not front-running institutions. Clearly I’ve had it wrong all these years.

“...a once in a decade chance to make some real money… I will be holding until kingdom come”

— Commitment level: eternal.

And yesterday:

“...these 100 million dollar companies we have partnered with”

— Slight reality check: GNLD circa ~$86m cash shell and USFM still needing to raise ~$30m last time I looked.

2

“I wouldn't be too strung up on this listing, and if nothing happens…”

— Interesting pivot, given the earlier “game changer” narrative. From boom to… maybe a polite plop?

“...we've had some unresearched punters in here which needs to be cleaned out,”

— Of course. Only the ramping cohort conduct true diligence. The rest of us merely observe.

“...he’s not here for a 50/50 chance of success and wasting his time”

— Impressive. Roughly 5x better than typical success rates for drilling an economically viable oil discovery. Must be magic.

3

“Nasdaq listing $GLND tomorrow. Watch this space. Going to be very lively. Huge money on the sidelines waiting for this”

— Which presumably explains the current flatlining…

“Its going to explode tomorrow. 90 mins to go ;)”

— 90 minutes later… still waiting for ignition.

“There are some big insto buyers lined up for post shareholder approval”

— Oh good. Anonymous “big instos” — always the most reliable source.

I’m sure there are many more pearls of wisdom doing the rounds, but having filtered out most of the dross I can only share a select few highlights.

That said, do keep it coming — this sort of enthusiasm can be very helpful in nudging a spike along. Having already taken some profit, I’m content to let the remainder ride into the listing and see how it plays out.

As with all my posts — past, present and future — this is IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. Please DYOR before making any investment decisions.

Silverfoxd

Well said — though I suspect your comments will land on deaf ears.

Investor bias is a powerful thing. It can take years to learn how to control / benefit from it. Once people have taken a position, any view that challenges their judgement, timing, or rationale is often met with resistance rather than engagement. Instead of counterpoints backed by evidence, the discussion can quickly drift into deflection, ridicule, or the recycling of tired narratives — and, like now, attempts to have dissenting views removed altogether.

There’s also a broader issue in that many participants either can’t or won’t carry out thorough due diligence, or are relatively new to the less transparent end of the market. That creates fertile ground for the rampers. Once drawn in, some then become part of the echo chamber themselves — continuing to promote regardless of underlying performance.

We’ve all seen examples where holders sit through very significant drawdowns — 97%+ in some cases — yet remain committed to the story. That’s often less about fundamentals and more about psychology.

Equally, it’s worth noting that certain posters appear across multiple boards with very similar messaging, often moving from one “opportunity” to the next.

The familiar “load and hold”, “in it for the long term”, “boom tomorrow”, “instos lining up” etc etc lines should be taken with a pinch of salt — particularly when they’re accompanied by persistent short-term hype. Such posters tend to disappear altogether once they've made a quick buck and claims of holding “until Kingdom come” are conveniently forgotten.

In the end, anonymous bulletin board commentary — especially when repetitive and promotional in tone — should always be treated with a healthy degree of scepticism. Particularly when the poster has a history of making similar posts across multiple boards and “moving on” when they've made their profit.

IMHO only. DYOR.

And here we go again — the familiar “former sacked director” narrative.

I can’t see who’s making the claim this time as a number of posts are filtered my end — possibly from individuals who have previously made similar false assertions.

For the avoidance of doubt, I have stated repeatedly that I am simply a shareholder. I have never had any employment, formal relationship, or dealings with the company or its employees.

The continued repetition of what appears to be a false and potentially defamatory claim rather speaks for itself.

It will be interesting to see how moderation is applied — particularly if such posts are allowed to remain while balanced and fact-based contributions are removed. That would be quite telling.

As with all my posts — past, present and future — this is IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. Please DYOR before making any investment decisions.

Board members should be aware that two posts I made yesterday evening were removed. I reposted them this morning and they’ve again been taken down.

For clarity, those posts were a light-hearted critique of what I consider to be fairly blatant ramping by certain posters, along with some comments on perceived inaccuracies in statements attributed to RP. Nothing, in my view, that would reasonably warrant censorship.

I’ve contacted LSE this morning to request clarification. This isn’t the first time this has happened — on a previous occasion, posts were removed in error, subsequently acknowledged as such, and reinstated. I’m hopeful the same outcome will follow here.

That said, readers may wish to make their own judgement as to whether there is an attempt by some to suppress opposing viewpoints. If the posts are not reinstated, it does raise questions about consistency of moderation and the balance of discussion allowed on the platform.

As always, IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. DYOR before making any investment decisions.

Silverfoxd

RP continues to demonstrate what I’d describe as very shrewd deal-making.

He’s managed to pick up an unprofitable asset that was bought out of administration and, within a relatively short timeframe, flip it into a company he was already aligning himself with on other ventures. In doing so, he appears to have largely removed forward risk while positioning for a likely profitable outcome.

The structure of the deal is also worth noting — consideration primarily in shares of the acquiring company. One would assume he had a reasonable expectation those shares could appreciate as the wider, interlinked projects begin to be promoted, by himself as well as others. Kerching, as they say.

And it doesn’t end there. If I’m interpreting things correctly, his investment vehicle also seems to have secured the ability to acquire further shares in the same company on favourable terms, with the timing and decision largely in his own hands.

Textbook example of looking after one’s own interests. As I’ve said before — he’s a businessman first and foremost. Surely he's unlikely to cut 80M shareholders any slack when push comes to shove.

As with all my posts — past, present and future — this is IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. Please DYOR before making any investment decisions.

Having thanked Ashton this morning for his “reassuring” post, I’ve since spent some time comparing the SEC S-4 documentation with the RNS releases from 80 Mile plc. There are a few additional nuances worth highlighting.

The RNS narrative provides a high-level summary — a relatively clean picture: 80 Mile retains a 30% interest in Jameson Land, with an implied valuation (~$92m), and initial drilling funded by March GL. However, the underlying S-4 adds a layer of complexity that isn’t really surfaced in those announcements.

Most notably, Clause 10.3 indicates that, following completion of the transaction, the parties will negotiate in good faith for March GL to acquire the remaining 30% on the same terms as the Pelican transaction. Not binding — but it clearly opens the door for GLND to move toward full ownership, something the RNS doesn’t exactly emphasise.

The S-4 also makes clear that:

Any future deal could be anchored to the existing transaction terms/valuation framework

The structure is conditional and subject to multiple steps

The long-term economics of the retained 30% (post initial wells) are less certain than the headline suggests

Operational control is likely to sit with the incoming entity rather than 80 Mile

There’s also an obvious potential conflict dynamic. With certain 80 Mile directors now aligned with GLND, any future negotiation over that remaining 30% will inevitably raise questions. While they are, of course, bound by fiduciary duties, the outcome may ultimately depend on how robustly the 80 Mile board is prepared to negotiate when sitting across the table from their new colleagues.

None of this contradicts the RNS — but it does add context. That “retained 30%” looks less like a long-term cornerstone holding and more like a negotiable position, where any eventual exit would, more likely than not, be toward consolidation within GLND rather than retention within 80 Mile, depending on how events unfold.

As always, IMHO only. DYOR.

Thanks Ashton - timely work and much appreciated.

What a spectacle — the ramping crew now arguing that white is black.

Up until yesterday they were falling over themselves to tell us what a great job RP was doing and how he could be relied upon to move the project forward.

Now, in their rush to dismiss his quoted comments, we’re suddenly told he’s made a mistake. Convenient.

It rather highlights the level of bias at play. When comments support the narrative, they’re embraced, repeated and embellished. When they don’t, they’re dismissed - even if they've come from the very top. Hilarious.

Unless and until there’s a clear retraction or explanation, the quote stands. It’s really quite simple — he either said it or he didn’t.

As with all my posts — past, present and future — this is IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. Please DYOR before making any investment decisions.

Jeez - I don't think I've ever seen so much pointless dross as has appeared on this board in the last few days. Hilarious - as ever.

Silverfoxd

I think those concerns are understandable. Given the sequence of events, it’s not unreasonable to ask whether there may be arrangements happening behind the scenes.

RM appears to have secured a role in what could be a larger and potentially more profitable vehicle, which may prove personally lucrative. At the same time,

Eric also seems to be moving to another position — which raises obvious questions about continuity at 80M.

I’ve previously highlighted a number of interconnected transactions between related parties. Against that backdrop, it’s fair to ask whether those involved are structuring deals to extract maximum value on their side, and at what cost to existing shareholders.

For example, the reduction of 25% of GS to a relatively modest £380k debt-for-equity swap does raise eyebrows. If the asset was as “lucrative” as suggested, why “dispose” of it on those terms?

It’s also worth noting that the directors’ option packages — alongside what many would view as an exceedingly generous EBT scheme — appear structured in such a way that they stand to benefit across a wide range of outcomes.

Ultimately, these are commercial operators acting in their own interests — as you would expect. The key question for shareholders is whether those interests are fully aligned with their own.

As always, something to think about.

IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. Please DYOR before making any investment decisions.

Sticks

Deramping?

I think you’ll find I’ve been entirely consistent. I’ve said many times I have no personal agenda. My view has always been that money can be made trading the spikes that tend to follow the company’s optimistic projections. It’s a pattern we’ve seen more than once, and one I’ve taken advantage of on several occasions — including during the period you claim anyone following my views would have missed out. So that narrative doesn’t really stack up.

At the same time, I’ve repeatedly highlighted what I see as numerous red flags — the sort that often lead to hype being followed by disappointment and a retrace. My position hasn’t changed: volatility creates opportunity, but it also demands caution.

To me this looks like another spike developing. Perhaps you think the share price will simply keep rising from here — if so, fair enough, time will tell.

What’s notable though is that the red flags I’ve previously raised have gone unanswered by you, despite you apparently being on the board for over a year. That silence is telling. If you have a genuine counter-argument to those points, feel free to post it.

And as for the “Yin vs Yang” comment — hardly. Around 98% of posts today are ramping. Caution is very much the minority view.

Also, why you think I’d be upset by Pelican Acquisition Corporation rising is beyond me. A stronger move simply adds fuel to the spike — which, if you’ve actually read my posts, is exactly what I’ve said I expect.

As always: IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. DYOR.

PIOU

Well done on taking the profit.

Judging by the amount of green I’m seeing on the board today, most of the clowns I’ve filtered are clearly in full flow again — either repeating their usual claptrap or having a go at anyone (like you) sensible enough to bank a gain. I’m rather pleased I don’t have to read their dross anymore.

That said, I’m equally pleased they’ve gone into full ramp mode — exactly as predicted months ago. Over a hundred posts today already, and I’d wager very few contain anything resembling new information. Just the usual confident guesses about where the price “should” or “will” go next and attempting to discredit anyone with an alternative opinion. Hilarious, predictable… and, if you’re paying attention, quite easy to exploit.

So by all means keep it up. The enthusiasm may well push the spike a little higher yet before I decide to take a bit more profit myself. The irony that this sort of frenzy tends to create nothing more than a short-term spike seems completely lost on the ramping crew and anyone who falls for their claptrap.

As with all my posts — past, present and future — this is IMHO only. Opinion, not advice. Please DYOR before making any investment decisions.