Member Info for RachT2

It appears my earlier suspicions were well-founded — Robert Price is indeed listed as the individual behind the newly formed company, USFM, which was incorporated just over a week ago and is now announced as 80M’s new “partner.” In fact, his is the only name shown on the Articles of Incorporation. Fancy that.

Interestingly, Robert Price’s name also appears across a number of other newly created entities, all of which seem to have been established specifically to enter into various interconnected arrangements with 80M. GS, JL and now Disko are all reliant upon these new entitiies.

Make of that what you will — but it’s starting to look very murky.

For the avoidance of doubt:

I’ve reviewed the relevant regulations, and my understanding of the position is set out below. This supersedes and takes precedence over any previous comments I’ve made on the matter. If anyone knows better, I’m all ears.

Under DTR obligations, it appears that RM made a substantial sale — possibly his remaining holding in Bluejay — after resigning as a director. The market was notified of his resignation on 23 June 2022. Subsequently, on 6 September 2022, he sold a significant number of shares, taking his holding below the 3% threshold — a notifiable event under the DTR rules.

Under these regulations, any person whose shareholding crosses a notifiable threshold must notify the issuer within two trading days of the transaction. The issuer must then inform the market as soon as possible, and no later than the end of the trading day following receipt of that notification.

In this case, the market was not informed of the sub-3% holding until 7 December 2023 — roughly fifteen months later. The delay raises an obvious question:

Did RM fail to notify Bluejay as required under his DTR obligations, or did Bluejay fail to notify the market in accordance with its own obligations?

Answers on a postcard. Perhaps our resident proxy could make enquiries during one of his many chats — though I won’t be holding my breath for a definitive response.

CC — I assume your comment was directed at me.

Once again, you’re mistaken. The guidelines are quite clear. You’ve previously stated that you’re an IFA, yet also admitted you can’t interpret a company’s year-end accounts or apply a macro/micro investing strategy — despite claiming to use one. That says it all.

I know several IFAs personally, and (like you) they have little to no understanding of company accounts, year-end or otherwise. Their role is essentially to select and review funds for clients, usually from an “institutional access only” Morningstar list rated by algorithm. They don’t invest in individual company shares, nor do they have real experience in how the market actually works.

Frankly, I have far more hands-on knowledge in this area than they do — an area well outside their expertise. Let’s not forget that many IFAs, just like Hargreaves Lansdown, were still promoting Woodford right up until the collapse. That says it all really.

So, no offence intended, but your IFA credentials carry no particular weight here.

Ashton, more ramptastic proxy rubbish from you -

“If RM fails to act in the best interest of shareholders, he too will be screwed, but by over 456 million times”

Do you not remember what happened after RM hyped up Dundas to ridiculous levels? Of course you do — you’re just conveniently ignoring the facts because they don’t suit your ramp-heavy narrative. Let’s recap: RM cashed out and made himself £millions, yet failed to inform the market as required. As a director, he was legally obliged to declare any significant share sale within 3–5 days — but he didn’t. The market only found out well over a year later. So tell me, what makes you think RM won’t or hasn’t done the same again? He’s already got form for exactly this kind of behaviour, hasn’t he?

Ashton

More deflection — tedious as ever. What a waste of everyone’s time.

I remain entirely unconvinced about the tangled web of inter-connected company dealings — and it’s only getting murkier. You claim JL is “backed by global leaders and internationally experienced operators such as Halliburton.” That’s disingenuous. Halliburton is not a backer — it’s a contractor being paid to do a job. Big difference.

You also said one of my opinions “was a blind prediction based on not knowing what news might be in the pipeline.” On the contrary — my views are based on years of over-optimistic, unfulfilled, ramp-heavy announcements that the company continues to churn out. I’ve posted dozens of red flags, all of which you consistently ignore in your proxy-like ramping.

Both you and CC may scoff at my latest prediction of a fund raise, but that’s nothing new. I was right on two previous occasions when you insisted it wouldn’t happen — and on one of those, I even guessed the exact price. So even if I’m wrong this time, the score still stands at 2–1 in my favour. Let’s see where the next raise lands — you might be getting yet more indigestion on that humble pie you seem to crave.

Thank you CC

For your further consideration; it would appear that USFM was established on the 27th October 2025 - a mere 7 days ago! It's sole director is the company formation agent. This info is 3rd hand so obviously DYOR.

Tony,

I’ve read and considered the points you raised, but I’ve come to a very different conclusion. To me, it sounds like USFM doesn’t currently have the in-house expertise needed to initiate drilling or mining and therefore needs outside help from the Colorado School of Mines. Naturally, the university will be delighted — it gives their professors and recent graduates a chance to work on a “real-world” project instead of classroom theory.

I honestly can’t recall another exploration company announcing a commercial partnership that depends on “current professors and recent post-graduates.” Can anyone else? Take KoBold for example — they have their own technical team, as do most credible operators in this space.

It’s also curious that Anglo American has shown no interest. Some posters here were adamant that AA would eventually come on board, yet here we are — RM accepting a partnership with a relative unknown that appears short on industry experience.

So again — who exactly is USFM? Who are its directors, and what are their credentials? Until we have more information, I’ll be retracting my earlier positive comment and treating this as little more than a ramp.

Daramuda, thanks for your post and for confirming that USFM is an SPV. How did you establish that Larry is a participant? Can you point me to a list of participants? I can't trace any info. Although, again, I suspect RP is involved here somehow - the plot thickens.

Looks like 1408. is correct. AI asked to check USFM comes back with -

There’s no independent public profile for “USFM Corporation” beyond the recent 80 Mile (Bluejay/80M) announcement — the name appears as the unnamed U.S. partner in 80 Mile’s Binding Heads of Terms to fund the Disko-Nuussuaq project and is described as being based in Golden, Colorado and intending to work with the Colorado School of Mines. Beyond that announcement (and re-reports of it by news aggregators), I couldn’t find a corporate website, SEC filings, or a clear registration record for a U.S. company called “USFM Corporation.”

Is this yet another private investment vehicle (SPV) set up solely in connection with 80M / RP? Hydrogen Valley was incorporated in June ’24 with one clear purpose – to acquire GS. Within six months GS had been “sold” to 80M. RP is listed as both a director and PSC of HV. Soon after, March GL appeared, again with a very narrow focus: exploiting JL. RP, by all accounts, is/was president of March GL.

We now have the March GL, GEL and Pelican merger in the works, creating GEC – with RP lined up as CEO. And somewhere in the mix, RM has reappeared as a director too. And then Greendome appeared.

RM is to be a director of USFM too - I wonder if RP is involved too.

Smoke and mirrors.

Wow. Excellent news for 80Ms long suffering shareholders. Well done to anyone holding - 2025 could indeed prove to be a pivotal year; better late than never.

Ashton — as ever, classic deflection. You’ve ignored every red flag and example of poor governance I raised, and instead focused on an irrelevant detail — the source of the information. I didn’t reply earlier because your comment / query was an irrelevance and missed the point entirely.

Did I say who provided the information about logistics timing? Or that 80M had actually issued an RNS on the matter? No, I didn’t. The point was that 80M knew about the delay well before now and failed to inform investors — despite being obliged to do so. Only today have they finally confirmed it via RNS.

As a listed company, 80M is required to notify the market immediately of any development that could materially affect the share price. The Board has repeatedly talked up a lofty valuation based solely on the upcoming Jameson Land drilling campaign — and now doubles down on that narrative again today. A change or delay to that programme is clearly material, yet at the time of my earlier post, the BoD had said nothing.

And it’s not just this. There’s still no sign of the promised updates on the GS grants, Thunderstone, Dundas, or Hamm and Out. Every RNS is the same — upbeat tone, rampy language, and promises of “timely updates,” which then vanish when the news isn’t positive.

Meanwhile, you’re happy to repeat and embellish every optimistic statement from the company, but completely ignore the repeated silence when reality doesn’t fit the ramp. Unless they can spin it as good news — however far-fetched (like claiming Kobold’s exit was a positive, seriously?) — the 80M BoD simply stay silent.

Malpenn - if you require further details I suggest you read through my many previous posts and DYOR. There's absolutley no point filling this board with copy and pastes highlighting previous comments.

Was about to post but I've not a lot more to add to what Ben has just posted - other than to stress the opinion of incoming fund raise. .

Does anyone actually know who Greendome is? I doubt it. From what’s available, it appears to be a small Canadian holding company — one that was first registered as having an interest in GS back in 2017. We all know what happened after that: seven years of mothballing. There are no easily available public filings for Greendome, which is… intriguing to say the least.

Here’s where it gets odd: the first 49% of GS was sold by HV (who supposedly owned 100%), yet the remaining 51% is now being bought from Greendome. How does that even add up? Was the HV purchase of GS never actually completed? Did RP and his supposed “tycoon” backers fail to raise the necessary funds? It just adds another twist to the growing uncertainty over the plant’s true ownership and history.

We’re now told that 50% of the plant (the tolling operation) will supposedly generate net income of around €8m — so at full capacity that’s potentially €15–16m+ - but 80M claim a ramptastic €24m, LOL. Yet the total price for acquiring 100% of the plant is under €4.7m. So the whole facility is being sold for less than 20% of one year’s claimed net profit? That doesn’t make sense on any commercial level. Still, ramptastic eh?

Why would Greendome or HV offload an allegedly profitable asset for what looks like pocket change? None of it stacks up. But of course, the usual rampers won’t touch these questions — they’ll, as usual, ignore them and just keep parroting the BoD narrative and pretend everything’s rosy.

Poiu - I think you've called it about right and that you'll get a chance to buy back in at a (much?) lower price. Well done on the profit. The price is now almost exactly the same as I sold out after the last run and like you I banked a profit. But, I'm intrigued as to what has changed your mind - yesterday you seemed quite positive; other than commenting on the lack of news. What's changed your mind?

Ashton scoffs at my recent post, calling it “laughable” — apparently because I can’t possibly know what announcements might be in the pipeline over the coming days, weeks, or months. Fair enough — I don’t. But so what? I’ve correctly called two of the last fundraises — one of them exactly at the right price — while Ashton was loudly insisting no fundraise would be needed.

And where’s the update from 80M confirming the change in timing at JL? We were told the Halliburton crew would be on site today, and that drilling would commence on 11th November ‘25. Now we find out drilling has been postponed for several months — yet not a word from 80M. Why not? Perhaps the news doesn’t fit their usual “ramptastic” narrative.

Let’s not forget the company’s track record when it comes to reliability of announcements. Ashton has long claimed to have close connections with certain BoD members and regularly posts as though he’s some kind of company proxy. Yet despite these supposed inside lines, he’s been caught out time and again — just as much in the dark as the rest of us. He can’t seriously argue that company statements have always been realistic, achievable, or accurate.

There’s no shortage of examples: repeated claims that Disko would be drilled in 2025; bold assurances that no fundraise would be needed before YE ’24; promises that GS would be generating revenue by Q1 ’25 or operating at full capacity by now. And here we are — yet again — with more delays and more excuses. The pattern speaks for itself.

Ashton does what a good proxy does — he parrots the official line, then adds his own spin to ramp the narrative further. If his information really does come from higher up the food chain, the question remains: who’s getting it wrong — Ashton, or his “sources”? Judging by the growing list of missed milestones and failed assurances, I think we all know the answer.

So yes, I don’t know what announcements are coming. But Ashton claimed to — and it didn’t stop him losing over 99% of his initial investment despite all his “insider insight”. My views are based on the company’s track record and the BoD’s repeated underperformance, and nothing I’ve seen to date changes that.

Ashton admits he ignores the past and focuses only on the future — the classic “this time it’ll be different, Rodders” mindset. Honestly, I can’t think of another company that has delivered such consistent disappointment and shareholder destruction, yet still somehow retains such a loyal puppet. That, to me, is what’s truly laughable.

BIXY - Disko has not been drilled yet. I've no idea what Bobtastic is talking about......

Ashton – how typically duplicitous of you. It seems you believe it’s perfectly acceptable for you (and the other rampers) to churn out endless claptrap and half-truths to support your bullish narrative, yet the moment someone challenges that view, their post becomes “laughable.” Despite giving the impression of being a company proxy, you clearly have no idea what news is actually coming – yet that doesn’t stop you from making constant claims, speculations, and hypotheses to prop up your ramping.

Let’s remind ourselves of your repeated assertions that Disko would be drilled in 2025 – stated as fact, with no caveats, no “ifs” or “maybes.” And now? That, Ashton, is what’s truly laughable. I’ll be revisiting this post in due course.

8.11.24 PS: As for Disko, it WILL be drilled in 2025.

5.12.24 I am confident enough to say Disko WILL be drilled in 2025.

13.12.24 Disko WILL be drilled in 2025 and I am 100% confident.

15.12.24 As for Disko, the question is not whether it will be drilled in 2025 but how many holes.

18.12.24 I repeat. I am still 100% confident that there will be drilling in 2025!

4.1.25 RM shared the positive news that Disko would be drilled this year (2025).

9.1.25 As for Disko, my understanding is that management is planning to drill at the back end of the field season this year (2025). Drill rigs are already in place in Greenland and can be deployed at short notice.

14.1.25 RM shared the positive news that Disko would be drilled this year (2025).

15.1.25 …….Rod McIllree said 80M is considering a few interesting options on multiple fronts. He was unwilling to be drawn into the details. We have to be patient for the update but, importantly, he confirmed drilling in 2025.

26.1.25 However, the decision now is to drill Disko this year (2025).

27.1.25 But the words RM used on Disko at the meeting that struck me most were that "several other alternatives" were being considered. RM was quite reticent to discuss further on the matter but at least he was able to confirm drilling at Disko in 2025 which pleased me no end!

27.1.25 Yes, that’s one possibility. But at the General Meeting, Rod McIllree was confident enough to confirm drilling at Disko this year

30.1.25 RM confirmed to the audience (not just to me) that Disko would be drilled in 2025.

4.4.25 At the General Meeting I attended on 13 January 2025, Rod McIllree informed the attendees that Disko would be drilled in 2025.

TRUST BUT VERIFY!

That’s got to be one of the most baffling investing mindsets I’ve ever come across.

Whatever the company, whatever the sector, shareholders should be able to rely on everything a Board of Directors states as being accurate, achievable, and correct. Unfortunately, JAY / 80M have built a long (and growing) track record of issuing over-optimistic – some might say inaccurate – statements. Dundas, Enonkoski, Outokumpu, Hammaslahti, the Austrian assets, Disko, Greenswitch, and now JL — all have suffered from the same pattern of big claims followed by poor / non-existent delivery.

Instead of holding the BoD accountable for this repeated over-promising, IvR seems to excuse it, instead putting the onus on PI’s that they should “TRUST BUT VERIFY.” That’s an astonishing stance. It effectively gives a free pass to any company to say whatever they like, whenever they like, and to draw in private investors — with little consequence when those statements don’t stack up. The fact that IvR himself has reportedly lost over 96% on his initial investment perfectly highlights how unrealistic it is for private investors to “verify” much of what a company puts out. If someone that committed and experienced can’t verify the claims made, what chance does the average PI have?

IvR (and those with similar thinking) are clearly biased in their outlook. As he’s filtered me, he won’t see this post, but perhaps it’s for the best — he can continue to invest in companies that regularly make undelivered promises. For others reading this, I’d strongly urge you to recognise that such a track record is not acceptable.

As for my long-held view: I still see an imminent fundraise ahead. If, as IvR suggests, JL drilling is now delayed, anyone hoping for a share price lift before the raise will likely be disappointed. 80M cannot realistically wait until next summer before raising funds. In my opinion, the current SP is as high as it’s likely to get until drilling progresses. My best guess remains a fundraise around the 0.38 level.

Plenty of entertainment on here lately. Some of the fantasy projections being thrown around for March GL are pure comedy gold. Massive production and profit numbers… yet not a single hole drilled!

Strange, isn’t it, how USGS, ARCO, and BP all took a very different view of Jameson Land? The USGS rated the prospect so low it didn’t even make it into their East Coast O&G assessment. ARCO spent millions on exploration, then walked away without drilling a single well. BP reached the same conclusion. But March GL apparently reckon oil and gas will soon be gushing out of the ground — and at production costs of $25+, supposedly cheaper than Norway, the UK, Canada, the US, Brazil, and Mexico. Almost as cheap as Russia or Saudi Arabia! Believe that if you like…I'm pretty sure any of the sovereign fund investments some rampers are fantasizing about will be not fall for such nonsense.

Let’s not forget — their figures are based largely on old data (which ARCO and BP would have already scrutinised) and a “reassessment” of that same data by a company linked to current 80M board members. Yet some seem happy to take it all at face value.

And what about the Disko drill that Ashton confidently said would happen in 2025? Looks like that’s vanished — just like his source RM’s promises. Another “definite” that never was.

Then there’s GS. Wasn’t production meant to be fully ramped up by now, with revenues flowing? Still no sign of feedstock, and the much-vaunted grants appear to have gone quiet — several application deadlines have passed without a single positive update.

Same old story: big talk, no follow-through.

My thanks to IvR for reiterating the unreliability of info that can be issued by the Jay / 80M BoD. There are multiple examples of over optimistic and unreliable info being announced - yet the rampers lap it up. EB asks 'Anyone who has coms with Eric .....' - not that long ago ES claimed that a fund raise would not be required - yet ONLY 9 weeks later a fund raise was announced! How's that for trustworthiness? And yet some people still give credence to their utterings - amazing.

CC – you’re absolutely right to question my judgement. I share my opinions, estimates, and interpretations just like everyone else here – and naturally, a few will miss the mark. I don’t claim to have a crystal ball. At least I’m willing to put my views out there, which is more than most.

If you choose to dismiss my take because one or two guesstimates were off, then by the same logic you’d have to dismiss Ashton’s too – he’s been proven wrong multiple times, including on whether drilling would proceed, when fund raises would (or wouldn’t) happen, and on asset values that ultimately turned out to be less than 1% of his projections.

But I suspect your bias will ensure you keep soaking up the ramping narrative while rejecting any opposing opinion.

Brilliant investment strategy. Good luck with your position.