Member Info for RachT2

A true comedy classic: Mr Proxy – the board’s most prolific fantasy writer – now suggests I should stick to facts. Hilarious.

As usual, when faced with red flags and FACTS he cannot dispute, out comes the same tired tactic: deflection. Instead of countering the evidence, he bangs on about my posting style, my reasons for posting, or my other investments – none of which are relevant. This board is here to discuss 80M, its risks and prospects, not me.

So, Ashton – which company FACTS do you actually disagree with? Or is it just another empty whinge from a biased ramper with no counter-argument? That’s the truth here, plain for all to see.

For the record, I’ve already answered (30/9/24) why I focus my posts here, and I’ve no intention of wasting further time on irrelevant sideshows. If in future anyone ducks the facts and instead trots out yet another off-topic question, my response will be simple:

“Please stick to the RELEVANT FACTS.”

That’s surely what most investors want from this board. The constant regurgitation of off-topic irrelevant questions is boring, adds nothing, and only exposes the weakness of the ramping case.

IvR

And yet here you are again – glued to every one of my posts and replying to most. Still no counter-argument, just the usual deflection and filler – predictable and pointless.

Thanks, though, for underlining the key point: Notional Value is completely immaterial to 80M. Some seemed unable to grasp that, but perhaps your post – has finally helped switch the lights on.

As always, happy to assist. If my posts bother you so much, the filter button is there for everyone – you included.

CB – I assume you’re referring to my posts? If not, then point us to the ones you mean that supposedly “create hysteria and anxiety.”

If you are referring to mine, then once again you’re spouting nonsense. Which of the FACTS I’ve raised do you actually dispute? None, as usual.

The reality is that it’s those very FACTS – which clash with the cloud-cuckoo gamble you’ve taken on Jay/80M – that you find uncomfortable. That’s hardly the same as me “creating hysteria and anxiety.”

For the record, I’ve no wish for the SP to fall (in fact, the opposite would suit my interests right now) and I’ve no vendetta against any current or past BoD members. But don’t let that stop you inventing excuses to ignore what doesn’t fit your narrative.

You seem happy to lap up every piece of positive spin while dismissing or attempting to rubbish the negatives. That isn’t investing, it’s wishful delusional thinking.

Your header was 'National Value', which you also referred to in your post - you do realise the subject was Notional Value don't you? You haven't expressed your opinion on how Notional Value might apply to 80M as yet - do please enlighten us. You have also failed to respond to my request for confirmation that you were told that as soon as commodity prices rose sufficiently GS would be sold off. That is what you posted on the board after attending the meeting and talking with RM.

For anyone still thinking 'notional value' has any relevance to 80M's SP here's a post I did in July. Anyone got a valid counter argument - none was forthcoming in July.

Notional value is a term primarily used in derivatives and financial contracts, representing the total face or theoretical value of an asset (e.g., a $1 million notional amount of an interest rate swap). It does not represent market value or realizable value.

………..

Why It Doesn’t Apply to Mining Assets

Mining and exploration assets are inherently different from financial instruments, for several key reasons:

1. Assets are uncertain and undeveloped

Early-stage exploration properties have no guaranteed commercial value until proven through drilling, resource definition, feasibility studies, and permitting.

Assigning a notional (face) value implies certainty or realization potential that simply isn’t present.

2. Valuation depends on many variables

Asset value hinges on:

Mineral grade and tonnage

Market prices for commodities

Costs of extraction and infrastructure

Political/regulatory stability

Environmental/social licensing risks

All these factors mean a single “notional” number would be misleading.

3. IFRS and accounting standards don’t allow it

Under IFRS 6 (Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral Resources), companies must use:

Historical cost (with impairment reviews), or

Fair value less costs to sell

There's no provision for using “notional” or arbitrary asset values.

4. Notional value implies liquidity

A notional value can be appropriate where assets are easily tradeable (e.g., bonds, options).

Mining projects are illiquid and highly bespoke; no clear market exists for many undeveloped projects.

………

What Do Mining Companies Use Instead?

Carrying value – historical cost adjusted for impairments.

Fair value (IFRS) – in rare cases where market comparables or transactions exist.

Net Present Value (NPV) – used in feasibility studies to estimate a project’s potential worth.

Enterprise Value per Resource Ounce or Tonne – used by analysts to benchmark peer projects

Summary

Mining companies don’t use notional value because:

It’s not meaningful or standardized in resource valuation.

It would imply certainty and liquidity where neither exists.

It’s not permitted by accounting standards.

More accurate and compliant valuation methods—like NPV, fair value, and carrying cost—are available.

Ashton – yet another attempt at ramping, full of regurgitation and groundless supposition. Everyone here understands what due diligence involves – no need for a dull lecture.

You say “my understanding is that the process is progressing well”. Based on what, exactly?

Insider info from 80M? Highly doubtful.

Official news releases we’ve all somehow missed? Even more doubtful.

Or is it just more baseless ramping on your part? Most likely.

Your “changing the subject” line – EBC’s role in any potential merger is irrelevant at this point. More pointless speculation.

Then you claim RM is a “fan” of Disko and that you “know this for a fact”. Nonsense. Of course he’ll say he’s a fan – he has to talk up the asset, especially now that Kobold, with far greater insight and resources, have walked away from it. If anyone knows the facts, it’s Kobold, and they clearly weren’t impressed.

You also previously claimed RM wished he had prioritised Kanger over Disko/Dundas. Yet he sold Kanger for just £370k, with only a possible (and far from guaranteed) £1.098m uplift. So he was also a “fan” of Kanger - until he wasn’t? The contradictions are laughable.

EBT Scheme – still lacking clarity. This is a step forward - the previous announcement was extremely light on figures.

The framework announced today looks reasonable in principle – linking rewards to market-cap milestones, overseen by the RemCo, and presented as aligning staff with shareholders. The overall dilution from the scheme has already been disclosed, so we know the potential scale.

But what we still don’t know is how those shares will be allocated:

No detail on the split between directors and staff, or any cap per individual.

Vesting mechanics remain vague – is it cumulative, pro-rata, or triggered by a brief spike?

Exploration/project milestones are still “to be defined”.

The Board retains wide discretion to hand out shares for “extraordinary effort” without firm criteria.

So while the dilution is known, the real cost to shareholders depends on allocation and vesting rules – and until that’s made clear, it’s hard to judge whether this is a fair incentive or just another enrichment tool.

Ashton - definetly not outlandish. An interesting and potentially beneficial possibility / development for 80M's long suffering shareholders.

IvR – Thanks for the laugh, much appreciated. Funny how quick you are to reply, yet still not a single attempt to dispute the facts I’ve posted. If your posts stuck to facts, they’d carry more weight – but that’s difficult when you can’t actually challenge them.

You say “Serious investors don’t need…” – yet here you are, glued to my every word. Spot the irony (again)?

You state I’ve been posting for 16 months. I’ve consistently urged caution, and that has proven correct. Compare that with your own record: nearly 4 years of ramping a share that’s fallen 99.7% since you declared it was heading into a “Pivotal Year”. So who’s really been talking nonsense?

Let’s take a look - a quick glance at just a few of your earliest posts:

Dec ‘21 – you posted you were buying at 8.80p. Since then? Down over 98%.

Jan ‘22 – you claimed 2022 would be a “Pivotal Year”. We all saw how that’s played out.

Apr ‘22 – you encouraged buying in the “low 7’s/late 6’s.” Another disaster.

You even floated asset valuations that were miles off reality. Example: Kanger – you suggested £20m for a 51% stake. The truth? 100% fetched just £0.5m, with only a possible £1.5m uplift.

Do I need to go on? There’s plenty more nonsense ………….

The price chart tells the story. Since your first self-proclaimed buys and endless “bigging up,” the slide has been relentless – down 98%+. But sure, you always know best. 😉

IvR – Still hanging on my every post I see, yet not managing to dispute a single fact I’ve raised. Instead, you default to the usual personal jibes – the textbook response of someone with no counterargument.

You state - ‘Genuine investors are watching progress unfold’ and that I’m ‘rewriting history’. FYI ‘genuine investors’ have been watching ‘progress unfold’ for several years now and have been rewarded with a 98%+ drop in the SP. Or were these earlier investors not ‘genuine investors’? That’s a pretty contentious argument you’ve resorted to in your attempt to discredit my post(s). Am I ‘rewriting’ history? What points do you disagree with? What points have I rewritten? Come on, back up your statement with facts. Oh no, I remember now - you can’t.

You keep telling others to use the filter option, yet here you are not following the advise you serve up to others. Why not? Strange that don’t you think? If you can’t point out which details in my posts you think are wrong, your replies amount to nothing more than a complete waste of everyone’s time - I’ll carry on posting regardless. If you’ve got facts, post them. I’d welcome that. If not, your attempts to discredit me only highlight your own desperation.

As always, good luck with your investment.

Mr Proxy has dug up a string of RNSs to support ES’s February claim that “2025 will be our best year to date”, with multiple successes in the following six months. Let’s actually look at those news items in order and see whether they stack up as “successes” – or whether it’s just more polishing.

19/12/24 – GS acquisition. We were told revenue would start Q1, offtake for 100% of production was a given, ramp-up in Q2, and “significant” annual revenue would follow. None of that has happened.

12/2/25 – Plant ready. Claimed the plant was ready and only waiting for feedstocks. Wrong.

11/3/25 – Operational update. Correction: plant still not ready, still under maintenance.

11/3/25 – Simple update. Added little of note.

19/3/25 – Sale of Finnish assets. Credit where due – better outcome than expected. £1.74m realised, earlier than agreed. But let’s not forget Ashton previously valued Hamm & Outo at $15m. That puts the deal in a different light.

3/4/25 – Simple update. Nothing to move the dial.

28/4/25 – Drilling at JL. Genuine good news.

6/5/25 – Court ruling. Also good news.

19/5/25 – Kobold pulls out. No spin can dress this up – a huge negative.

2/6/25 – Sale of Kangerluarsuk. $0.5m upfront, possible $1.5m uplift. Ashton’s “value” was $34m. Again, not such a great deal when viewed against those projections.

8/7/25 – Finland assets back. 80M did well to retain them plus the earlier £1.74m, but the real value now looks much lower than rampers ever suggested.

9/7/25 – Extra 25% of GS for £380k. Values the whole plant at £1.5m. Does that sound like an asset about to throw off £millions in spare cash / profit?

30/7/25 – MoU with NACATA. They’ve not secured feedstocks and offtake - they’ve obtained a non-binding MoU, that's vastly different. Let’s see if it ever becomes a binding deal, and at what terms. NACATA has its own customers and shareholders – why give 80M generous margins? Particularly for a 5 year deal. A five-year lock-in could be a bad move if the numbers are tight.

31/7/25 & 11/8/25 – Simple updates. Neither adds real value.

The “partner hunt”. The last two announcements are just more talk of needing partners for Disko. We’ve seen this pattern in RNS after RNS for years. Yet the SP remains near all-time lows.

So – does this look like “our best year to date”? Or does it look like the usual mix of over-promising, under-delivering, and a couple of small wins lost in a sea of missed targets?

Fingers crossed that any future deals / partnerships deliver more for shareholders than the previous ones have.

IVR - Thank you for your continued interest in my posts / opinion. You frequently advised others to filter me and then claimed nobody reads my posts anyway - spot the irony? Anyway, nice to know you're always listening.

Certain bullish posters repeatedly regurgitate old news almost as infinitum yet you don't seem to have a problem with that - strange that. If I didn’t know better I’d think it showed a bias on your part.

CB - thanks for your reply. I note you've not answered the questions regarding what you consider 80M’s assets to be worth; you’ve referred to them as ‘fabulous’ but don’t seem to have any idea as to their value. Is that a fair assumption? You criticise me for posting the obvious, unfortunately that’s pretty much all negatives, but appear to have no real counter argument yourself. You just hope. You have your fingers crossed that AA might be interested in Disko - despite the fact that they have many more times the land area and have yet to further any real development on that. As you say, they could just wait for 80M to run out of money - or buy it wholesale with a fraction of their own income. Or they could be quietly discussing their own partnership with Kobold - now wouldn’t that be interesting? And exactly what are you hoping the BoD is working so hard for at GS? You have told us they want to sell it when commodity prices rise. So as soon as it might start to turn a profit they plan to sell it? Did I understand you correctly? What happened to all the ramping speculation about massive profits funding loads of other projects? That doesn’t look likely does it?

CB – No surprise you’ve not responded, that’s the usual. But your last post does raise the obvious question: what value do you actually place on these so-called “fantastic” assets? Because the numbers tell a very different story. I posted previously -

Kangerluarsuk – 80M’s own RNS (12/6/25) references the 2023 accounts, showing a loss of -£2,485,947. They sold it for just £370k ($500k) plus a possible £1.098m ($1.5m) “uplift” if a resource is proven. Big if, no timeline, no certainty. Even with the full uplift, that’s £1.468m proceeds = net loss of -£1,017,947.

FinnAust Mining Finland (Hamm & Out) – Sold for £250k cash plus shares in MET1, which together brought in close to £2m. But the 2024 accounts show a loss of -£5,511,688 tied to FinnAust. Net result: loss of ~-£3,261,688.

Combined – 80M spent £7,997,635 acquiring/developing these assets and sold out for a combined -£4,279,635 LOSS. Some “lucrative” deals! And let’s not forget MET1 handed those “valuable” Finnish assets back within months, free of charge.

Doesn’t this illustrate the real worth of 80M’s so-called “valuable” assets? Remember, a certain ramper once put valuations at 100x the actual realised figures. 4 assets that were sold realised just 0.6% of the ramper’s figures! I hope you aren't so naive to be relying on such projections.

So, genuine question, CB:

Greenswitch – You’ve admitted HV will sell ONCE commodity prices rise. But if 25% was swapped for just £380k debt, how much is it really worth right now?

Finnish assets – What value do you give them today?

Disko – If Kobold, with deep pockets and industry expertise, walked away from a 51% stake rather than spend what for them is small change, how “fantastic” is it really?

IVR – You’ve often told others to ‘filter’ me, yet you clearly don’t follow your own advice, since you still read and reply to my posts. Strange behaviour. And now you claim nobody else reads them – so is it just you then? Appreciate the attention.

CB – Indeed, and I’ve simply posted my opinion. My position on the EBT and the generous BoD options (largely self-awarded) is clear. Do you agree with me or not? You haven’t actually said – instead, as usual, you’ve ignored the issues raised and simply criticised me for pointing them out. You then repeat that you’re here for the future and the long-term value you believe sits in 80M’s assets, but just how much greed from the BoD are you willing to tolerate? Seems like you’ll swallow whatever they feed you. Time and again assets that were actually monetised delivered only a fraction of the values once claimed. Why should the outcome be any different this time, given it’s the same BoD in charge and pretty much the same rampers bigging it up?

Another desperate ramp. No doubt I’ll be labelled a FUD spreader again in the usual “witty” response. Boring! But let’s look at the facts:

The EBT has been introduced with the share price sitting close to an all-time low. That timing suits the BoD perfectly, giving them the chance to make an even bigger fortune if the SP ever recovers. But who exactly are these “other staff” supposed to benefit from it? Doesn't the BoD comprise almost 100% of 80M’s ‘staff’?

We’re told the freebies are linked to “vesting and performance conditions tied to milestones” – yet we’re given no detail. They’ll be dished out whenever it suits those at the trough. If shareholder value was the priority, the EBT would have clear, market-disclosed targets – ones that ordinary holders could actually recognise as meaningful.

Meanwhile, long-term investors are still waiting for the SP to multibag just to get back to breakeven, having swallowed years of over-optimistic promises that never materialised. And now, while the SP continues to slide, the BoD quietly enrich themselves further with even more easily acquired shares.

So when IVR tells us this isn't the red flag he initially thought it was – is he deluded, or is this just another ramp? I think he was correct in his initial interpretation.

PMSL 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Each of the last few years were supposed to be great years too - but then reality comes along. Don't hold your breath,

Thanks for the response, Ashton. Despite your presumption, I’ve seen the slide you’re referring to, but I don’t see how that indicates any imminent ‘news’. As you illustrate, the timing of most campaign events is already public knowledge, so there’s nothing particularly new about repeating them as they happen. Even confirmation that the ship has sailed is hardly “news” in itself. Realistically, I wouldn’t expect any meaningful update until early to mid-November, when we should hear that drilling has actually commenced. Until then, it’s just the usual boring logistics — rigs, crew, and equipment being moved around — which isn’t really newsworthy or of any importance. Crucially, there is nothing imminent (regarding JL) that is likely to effect the share price.

Surely 80M must be looking at a fund raise soon if they’re serious about drilling Disko in ’25. I suggested months ago a likely placing range of 0.20–0.22 — and nothing I’ve seen changes that view.

Certain bulls keep stating that Disko will be drilled in ’25 and that the equipment is ready… so what's the delay? Tick tock, tick tock. A full drill, as Kobold recommended, is in the ballpark of $13m. Even a scaled-down third of that is ~$4.25m — still a hefty bill, and it would look like a half-hearted, poor-value effort.

As for GS, despite the usual rampers claiming it’ll be a cash machine, that’s clearly not happening any time soon — if ever. In reality, 80M is almost certainly liable for 49% of ongoing COSTS. No feedstock sorted yet, costs climbing.

Dundas? Supposed to be “advanced” this year — not much sign of that.

Finnish assets? More likely shoved to the back burner indefinitely.

So where’s the money coming from? Options look limited:

Tiny “token” drill (pretty meaningless)

No drill at all

Fund raise (most likely)

Any other scenarios people see that would actually appeal?

CC – I was the only one who responded to your question about a notional value, and you dismiss it as “pooh pooh”? That’s the extent of your rebuttal? No counter-argument, no intelligent engagement with the points I raised? Instead, by your own admission, you don’t grasp the basics of financial accounts, yet feel qualified to wave away my reply with playground terminology.

You also seem unable to appreciate the utter irrelevance of assigning a “notional value” to a minerals/mining stock. Instead, you hang your hat on a ‘notional’ value and the values of a state fund that RM has chosen to compare 80M with. Really? RM’s track record obviously inspires you. 🤣

BA – re JL, you claim “not long for some news on the campaign.” How exactly do you know when news is coming? Sure the boats sailing is known - but beyond that…….? Let’s hope any news is soon, reliable, and actually benefits the SP and shareholder value.

80M’s “news” track record – a reality check

19/12/24 – Revenue generation expected Q1 2025 🤣

19/12/24 – Q2 aim to ramp up biodiesel production 🤣

12/02/25 – Production within weeks – once feedstock delivered 🤣

11/03/25 – Refurb finished, 29 staff on site. Plant making good progress 🤣

09/07/25 – HV so keen to dump GS, lets 80M take 25% stake for just £380k in debt-for-equity swap – valuing the whole thing at a mere £1.52m. 🤔

30/07/25 – MOU signed for 5 years’ feedstock supply. Translation: still no feedstock on site, no firm contract signed, no start date, no volumes disclosed. 🤔

We’re now well into Q3. The original Q1 target slipped to Q2, now drifting again. Will Q4 actually see production, or is this another “just around the corner” promise?

Meanwhile, costs tick up: 29 staff salaries, maintenance, insurance, business rates, etc etc… and 80M now liable for 49% of it. Where's that money coming from? The £368k from Amaroq won’t stretch far in this business.