Member Info for RachT2

The board is rather quite now; realisation has kicked in and the market has chosen a more appropriate SP level. Quelle surprise.

Today's humour has been supplied by ramptastic EarlyB, take a bow. He / she claims I am the one looking stupid. Oh, the irony of it. Here are just some of the many posts EB has made and the prevailing 80M SP when they were made. What a laugh.

0.68 - Should fly past 1p today

0.68 - Then build onto 2p

0.655 - It’s far too cheap here

0.635 - fully expect this to break out towards 1p this afternoon

0.64 - Looking ready to go now 0.64

0.64 - Has to build higher

0.64 Only a matter of time before the brakes come off here

0.61 - Gap up to 1p+ tomorrow nailed on

0.59 - Profit taking coming to an end……up we go soon

0.59 - 1p+ before the weekend

0.59 - People selling out will be kicking themselves

The “3 amigos” are at it again – mutual support and brown nosing. Just a reminder: this has been their pattern for years, despite the share price collapsing by around 99% during that time.

Take IvR as an example. Over the past three years he’s:

Consistently rubbished the current BoD.

Put forward valuations that proved wildly inaccurate.

Seen his initial investment lose over 96%.

Told others the “ideal entry” was 6–7p.

Made projections that never materialised.

Backed a series of over-optimistic company announcements that came to nothing.

Yet he remains invested and, along with his two amigos, continues to ramp the company. Hardly a model of sound investment judgment.

Investors should keep their track record in mind before giving too much weight to their commentary.

Continued...

My hunch is that Disko initial exploration results including assays will be fully out by end of year. If results are good, and I expect they will be, the SP will re-rate significantly.

Am only here for Disko - don't give a ****e about anything else. This time next year we should know what's in the ground????

Given the level of surveys and potential 2023 campaign - it doesn't look like Rio are giving up on this…

Greenland looks likely to be Kanger - assume atleast 20m for a 51% stake

Finland looks likely to be Enonkoski - assume another 20m for a 75% stake (same deal again)

Ideall, I wouldn't like to see Dundas sold but ideally also farmed out like the ones above 15m for a 51% stake.

Maximum valuation is probably 90m including Disko and Dundas. excl. Disko max 75m.

Either the eggheads at Kobold don't know what they are doing or saying or something isn't right…

What first alerted me to Bluejay was a friend of mine that said in relation to Disko, "even if they have a tenth of what they think they have this will be massive for Bluejay." For context my friend did some work for Bluejay (post Kobold JV) and is a geophysicist.

However, when Kurt House, CEO of KoBold Metals, comments: "Our joint exploration campaign on Disko Island this summer was a significant step forward. We've identified many novel targets and significantly updated our exploration hypotheses. We are looking for what we think could be the most significant nickel and cobalt discoveries in 100 years." - it also goes the other way if the don't drill - as in do these guys not know what they are talking about -> credibility and reputational risks!

Point 3 - is not really my concern, the fact that they have spent 10m plus on Phase 1, conducted huge analysis and identified a significant number of targets . If they cut and run, wouldn't that go the other way and show that their tech isn't all it's cracked up to be if they don't prove what's in the ground... This would have reputational risks for them IMO. They will drill - they will want to prove their tech works.

IvR

Just been reading through some of your posts - much hilarity, thank you. Not only do you talk a load of nonsense you regularly change your opinion to suit your fluctuating narrative. It's amazing you're still invested here - your initial investment was down some 96%, you expressed your discontent (on several occasions) at some of the most prominent BoD members (that are still here), your assumed valuations have been shown to be pure fantasy and most of your predictions have failed to materialise. Oh dear, what a torrid 3+ years you've had. Yet here you still are - one day Rodney. 🤣

Let's have a read of some of your posts to get a flavour of your ever changing opinion and the nonsense that you've been posting for the last 3+ years. These are not in any particular order and are but a small sample.

Rod McIllree (RM)? Do you mean Robert Edwards (RM) the new chairman or the old useless one Rod?

Plus anyone else that RM brought in should be shown the door!

RMc coming back for me means we are back in the milking and bull poop phase - where shareholders will be continually be told 'just around the corner' stories, diluted and cap raised into the ground.

I would like to restate my previous position that I am Bullish on Bluejay to Bearish! These guys are too busy playing 'Game of Thrones' with our investment to be a serious investment after this RNS.

The market really don't like the latest update. It's pure incompetence at best and market manipulation at worst. Heads should roll for this! …….. Think I will be moving more of my capital into other junior minors like Ironbark Zinc, atleast they are transparent with a competant board and CEO! Note - RM, ES & MH were BoD members then and now.

Management: Long term holders on here will tell you that the BoD have led them up the garden path on multiple occassions and are super slow, don't have the best track record (i.e. where are the Enonkoski Assay results) and are bad at communicating.

Financing really needs to be in place by end of Q1 / early Q2 to have a chance of doing prep work for Greenlands summer. I really hope they start being more transparent and get the financing in place asap to restore some credibility!

All in all, I think that's all of the bad news out of the way and the decks are clear(er) but any management from the last BoD still hanging around should be shown the door.

Pure speculation here, but perhaps Kobold had a hand in the coup de tat... Strategics aside it's the only thing that I can think of, Kobold probably weren't too happy with RE (for some reason) and they brought back familiar faces who are a known quantity (despite their previous track record) and where they knew "goals" were aligned. Otherwise, RMc, Sondergard and Troy could just be opportunists.

Bluejay Pivotal Year

IMO, if you can get in at the low 7s late 6s you should be ok

Continued......

Divitiae

Why assume a 50% discount? While I agree a fundraise is more likely than not, a cut that steep seems excessive. Quoting such a figure without any substance makes it sound like the usual guesswork we get from first-time posters. If you want to be taken seriously, perhaps expand on your points and share something concrete. Otherwise, it’s hard to see any credibility to your posts. Personally, I’m not expecting you to provide any fresh information at this stage and will regard your posts accordingly.

The rampers made a big song and dance about GS applying for government grants, with 80M even naming three funds in an RNS.

The first was open until 8/4/25.

The second was “open for applicants during March and April 2025.”

80M also stated that “funds are expected to be awarded during first half 2025.”

Well, here we are, and no sign of success on either front. As for the third grant – this was a reapplication for one GS had supposedly been earmarked for before HV’s acquisition fell through the cracks. Back in Feb ’25 we were told the re-application was submitted and they were “waiting for a response.” Yet nothing since. Either they’ve failed, are still waiting, or simply haven’t updated shareholders. None of those options looks particularly impressive.

Now, let’s remember – for 80M to acquire the remaining 51% of GS the price agreed was £6m. If GS turns out to be a dud, HV might accept a massive haircut (80%+ off) just to get rid of it. But if GS is successful, HV will surely want the full £6m. Where on earth does 80M find that kind of money? Especially when every RNS tells us they’ve got multiple “great projects” they plan to push forward – all of which need funding too.

So we’re looking at:

£6m for the other half of GS (if it goes well).

Ongoing cash burn.

Development costs across the portfolio.

Licence obligations (they can’t just sit on them).

All that from a 49% share of GS profit (if there is any), from a plant with no feedstock or revenue at present and no company projection as to just when they might appear. Doesn’t take a genius to see where this might be heading – another raise looks more and more likely.

Ashton / IvR

Wow, the level of blinkered bias here never ceases to amaze me. I haven’t confused anything, nor do I think I’ve “misframed” anything.

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.

So are you really suggesting there’s no link between HV and March GL/GEC? Or that HV was in such “distress” it had to accept an 80% haircut on the GS settlement price? Are we meant to believe that none of RP’s well-heeled contacts were prepared to back HV and prevent such a low-ball deal? Especially when rampers here insist GS is a fantastic asset about to throw off huge amounts of cash?

From day one I said the whole structure looked suspicious, and nothing since has changed my view. Consider this scenario: RP & co (maybe with RM’s help) have pulled off a blinder. If GS proves profitable – everyone’s happy. If not, 80M won’t be able to fund its share of the losses or advance any of its own projects, and RP/HV/GEC could pick up 80M for peanuts. Beyond the first 2 holes at JL 80M doesn't have a free carry - they meet 30% of ongoing costs. That includes further drills if required and infrastructure costs. If they can't meet those costs GEC have the upper hand. Notice how RP was so keen for 80M to take the 25% they practically gave it away. Just to get 80M to that 49% holding? Will 49% of any profit (if there is any) at GS be enough to fund the remaining £6m payable to HV for 80M to acquire the remaining 51%? Unlikely? Particularly if 80 it to use any of that money to forward ANY of its other projects. So is it likely that HV / RP retains control of GS too?

Edit. Just catching up on Ashton’s post. He quipped: “Maybe RP was happy to settle for less than 20% of the agreed price for GS, knowing Greenswitch would come back by merging 80M with Greenland Energy Company later!” Many a true word is spoken in jest. I think he's correct.

But let’s be real: a “cordial working relationship” between RP and RM doesn’t remove the business realities. A takeover is every bit as plausible as a merger.

If GEC can acquire 80M at a bargain, why wouldn’t they? They’d gain a solid foothold in Greenland O&G, including Disko and Dundas, and they WILL have access to the funds necessary to advance the projects. Strategically, it’s a clear win for them.

CC – appreciate you sharing the article, it’s always good to see the counterarguments. A couple of points though:

The chart clearly states it doesn’t include biofuels. You’ve often highlighted growing demand/supply for biofuels when talking up GS, so are you suggesting that both fossil fuels and biofuels will see rising demand out to 2050?

The chart shows STEPS, APS and NZE scenarios. Most would agree NZE is highly unlikely, but STEPS and APS are realistic outcomes. If biofuel output increases and STEPS/APS play out, that would mean less fossil fuel will be required.

The main point though – the article stresses the need for new fields and upgrades to EXISTING ones because EXISTING wells alone won’t meet demand. That’s obvious, no one’s claiming otherwise. Of course there will be new developments and reinvestment.

But, a country’s proved reserves include both producing reserves from current fields and undeveloped reserves in known fields that just haven’t been exploited yet. Proved reserves don’t automatically mean “already producing.” So, the point still stands – existing proved reserves will likely be enough to meet (and maybe exceed) projected demand, provided they’re developed or enhanced. And, as always, it’ll be the lowest-cost producers that come out on top.

On 9/7/25, 80M announced completion of stage 3 of the GS acquisition, picking up an additional 25%. The original agreement priced this stage at £1m cash plus 423,957,023 new shares. With the share price around 0.27p at the time, the stage looked to be worth around £2.1m.

Yet HV has now effectively parted with that same 25% for just £380k in a debt-for-equity swap. On that basis, the implied value of the whole GS plant is closer to £1.5m.

Some posters argue that Robert Price & co. are well-funded to drive JL forward—but if that’s the case, why did they settle for less than 20% of the agreed price when selling down GS? To me, it suggests they don’t see much long-term value in GS and were keen to exit, though I could be wrong of course.

More comedy, keep them coming. Some clown says I've been wrong for the last year. I advised caution and highlighted multiple red flags. I correctly predicted the last 2 fund raises (even getting the price of one spot on) while rampers such as Ashton were 100% convinced they wouldn't be happening and repeatedly posted an opinion that proved to be WRONG. And my last trade made over 80%. Can't see I got anything much wrong.

With the arrival of newbies comes the giggles. Always the same, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. From EB we get today's laugh “Confirmed zero possibility of a placing here, sorry Bobat” - and this is from someone who's research obviously doesn't extend beyond what 80M want him / her to know as they clearly don't read beyond the RNSs. The MarchGL presentation has been around for ages yet EB says - “None of this info on spud date has been released via RNS from 80M, so actually I had no clue the spud was happening so soon”. Oh dear.

IvR’s recent post rightly underlined how many projects 80M are trying to manage simultaneously. Each licence they hold requires work commitments – if they don’t deliver, they risk losing them. They cannot simply sit back and wait for market conditions to improve or partners to step in.

So the real question remains: how will they fund these obligations? There’s no revenue (and certainly no profit) from GS yet, so a placing to raise capital seems a realistic possibility.

BP (BP) has halted development of a planned standalone biofuels facility at its Rotterdam refinery in the Netherlands, Reuters reported Monday, citing a company spokesperson.

The oil giant's decision comes amid the latest in a SERIES of scrapped projects as oil majors scale back renewable fuel ambitions amid SOFT DEMAND, according to the report.

BP has also stopped or paused work on plants in Australia, Germany and the US, leaving only its Castellon, Spain, site as a possible long-term option, Reuters reported, adding that BP also dropped its goal of producing 100,000 barrels per day of biofuels by 2030.

BP will instead expand co-processing capacity at existing refineries and continue to assess biofuels alternatives at its refining sites, Reuters quoted the company spokesperson as saying.

Wow, a ship that's supposed to be where it is - is where it is. Amazing stuff. It's journey is all scheduled and stops are all known. Wow, amazing stuff, fantastic news. Err, it's just normal logistics. Boring. Tell us something we don't know, something that makes a difference.

Excellent article appeared 2 days ago - illustrates the dynamic economics of oil prices

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Whats-The-Real-Reason-Behind-OPECs-Surprise-Oil-Production-Boost.html

CC & IvR – you’re raising some valid points.

Dundas: To put it simply, the Bluejay BoD (mainly under RM) repeatedly told the market and institutions that Dundas would be profitably producing ilmenite years ago, with a supposed mine life of ~80 years. In hindsight, that was far too optimistic – the project now sits idle.

80M’s position: IvR is incorrect - it’s not simply a case of sitting back and waiting for prices or alternative income streams. 80M do not have that luxury I'm afraid. The reality is that exploration licences come with work commitments. If 80M doesn’t carry out the minimum required programmes, the licences lapse. On top of that, several of them are due to expire at the end of 2026 regardless.

Worthwhile having a recap on some of the many redflags that I've raised regarding 80M / JL - the rampers have attempted to flood the board with nonsense and suppress such posts.

The USGS assessment of the JL basin (and remember, 80 don’t control the whole basin) suggested less than a 7.2% chance of identifying even a single 50mmboe+ accumulation. To put that in perspective, 50mmboe equates to just 1/20th of 1bn boe (around 5%), and under 0.5% of the 12bn boe that some suggest that 80M are sitting on.

The cost of producing oil on Greenland will almost certainly be prohibitively high, certainly higher than virtually all the other current oil producers.

Region/Country Estimated Cost per Barrel (USD)

Middle East (e.g., Saudi Arabia, Iraq) $10 – $20

Russia $15 – $25

U.S. Shale (tight oil) $40 – $55

Canada (Remote Onshore - Oil Sands) $50 – $70

North Sea (UK/Norway) $40 – $60

Norway Onshore $60 - $90

Deepwater Offshore (e.g., Brazil, Gulf of Mexico) $40 – $60

Greenland Onshore $60 - $100+

The amount of oil some claim 80M is sitting on is but an insignificant fraction in the global market place. Proved oil reserves listed below. ARCO’s estimated oil in the JL basin now held by 80M may contain 2.4 - 8.1 bn boe.

Based on BP Statistical Review (2023–24), here are PROVED reserves (bn boe):

Greenland - none

Venezuela: 300

Saudi: 280

Iran: 200

Canada: 165

Iraq: 145

UAE: 105

Kuwait: 100

Russia: 90

US: 75

Libya: 45

Current ANNUAL production and years left before PROVED reserves are depleted

Saudi Arabia 3.28 bn bbl/yr.- 70-80

Canada 2.19 bn bbl/yr. - 80

Iran 1.20 bn bbl/yr. - 140

Iraq 1.46 bn bbl/yr. - 80-90

UAE 1.07 bn bbl/yr. - 80

Kuwait 0.95 bn bbl/yr. - 100

Russia 3.36 bn bbl/yr.- 25-30

United States 4.82 bn bbl/yr.- 10-12

Libya 0.47 bn bbl/yr. - 70-80

Venezuela O.3bn bbl/yr.- 500+

This post will now almost certainly be followed by a succession of biased rampers posting irrelevant claptrap in an attempt to deflect from these extremely pertinent figures and flood the board. Note - none of the rampers will dispute these figures.

Wood - oh great, yet another one that has no valid argument so instead vents their frustrations on the messenger. Do you think the USGS have got it all wrong? Do you think all the company’s previous tweets have been achieved / fulfilled? No reply? No, I thought not. Instead saying I'd make a good serial killer and calling me a liar. Thanks for your intelligent, insightful and articulate input to the board - very constructive and helpful. Not.

And you think you can censor my opinion? How comical.

Mornington - I have followed this company for years and witnessed the many spikes and the reasons behind them. I've profited from many of them and intend to continue to do so. Why waste all the information I've accrued and “move on” - I'd much rather continue to benefit by utilising that knowledge and by staying close.

Ashton - despicable behaviour is blatantly ramping a share for years while it drops over 98%. Anyone falling for your constant BS would have lost a lot of money. Anyone following my opinion would not have, and more than likely made some. You are despicable.

Anyway, as Ashton has pointed out this is now a much more widely held share with a lot more individuals who don't want to hear the negatives. I'll continue to post them but henceforth I won't be responding to any posts that don't contain a valid counter argument to the facts / figures / red flags that I raise. I will continue to welcome valid counter arguments. Sure, loads of people will be slagging me off - good luck to them. I know the company better than most and I aim to be making money as before - profiting from the many spikes created by the BoD’s over optimistic “news” and the usual hollow ramping that follows. Good luck to anyone invested here.

Mornington – It was “fantastic news” in the sense that it generated another spike, which gave me (and others) the chance to take a profit. I wasn’t suggesting the news itself was fantastic, just that – along with the usual rampers – it created the conditions for a spike. Apologies if that wasn’t clear in my earlier post.

EB – I don’t believe that’s accurate. The USGS assessment of the JL basin (and remember, 80 don’t control the whole basin) suggested less than a 7.2% chance of identifying even a single 50mmboe+ accumulation. To put that in perspective, 50mmboe equates to just 1/20th of 1bn boe (around 5%), and under 0.5% of the 12bn boe you’ve mentioned. It seems a stretch to argue the USGS are that far off – or are you suggesting their findings should be completely disregarded?

Wow - what a coincidence, that looks just as ramptastic as all the many many previous tweets telling us how fantastic Dundas was, how great Enonkoski was, how great the Kobold deal was, how great Thunderstone was etc etc etc. Oh dear, looks like all of them proved to be far too optimistic Spot the pattern?

In fact a quick scan through historic tweets is a great way to establish just how reliable company announcements are. Enjoy - it's all very amusing.