Member Info for RachT2

I see there was another big drop in Metals One yesterday - that now puts Jay's / 80M's share in MET1 as being worth only £359,000, quite a big drop from the £3,250,000 'value' that was much trumpeted at the time; in fact nearly 90%. As I've said previously, 80M doesn't have any money to enable it to subscribe for the further fund raises that MET1 will need going forward. 80M share of MET1 will be further diluted leaving it with a pittance. Strangely a very similar position to that 80M's own shareholders have found themselves in.

Tomhuk, thanks for your reply.

I do not, and never have, found it necessary to establish the position of a source of information - ultimately facts are facts, which can easily be verified by a little further research. Surely it matters not who posts them?

The fact that you can't pigeon-hole me is of no consequence to me and should not be of any consequence to you either. Nor should it impinge upon you doing balanced and thorough research. To offer balance to the stream of perpetually bullish posters you could do worse than read my posts. But, hey ho, good luck whatever you decide to do.

Hi Tomhuk - and thanks to CC for a wild guess, amusing :-)

I'll copy a post I made in August in reply to a similar question and would add that posts that state what people own, or buy, or sell are the most pointless there are. Why would it matter whether or not some one like me , or Ashton, or CC, or Investorace, or Officecat etc etc etc do, or indeed whether or not we currently hold? Everyone has been been proven wrong with their speculations and purchasing prowess on multiple occasions - guessing correctly is just that - a guess. One of the most profuse Jay / 80M postere has lost a lot of the value in their 'primary stake' - around 95% down, so what can you learn from that? Nothing is my guess.

Bez - you're obviously not reading my previous posts. I have been in and out of Jay several times - I don't state whether I hold or not (you'll have to guess) but I can tell you I've not got any loss in Jay. I don't consider myself as a trader (no level 2 or anything like that) but just try to make a profit here and there whenever / wherever I can. Shares like this are great for that - can be up and down like a yoyo - but needs watching for BOD tricks - never a long term hold in my opinion.

Couldn't cast your net much wider if you tried - so you would have us believe that we should be expecting news about Disko and news of a partnership and news of project funding from an external source and news of an asset sale. Wow, that's vague in the extreme. You've left out news about WF, Dundas etc etc - presumably you aren't expecting any imminent news about these other projects? Wild guesses are all I see.

Well what an amazing coincidence - RM / FinnAust / Jay were making the exact same comments about partners, JVs and commercialisation of Pituffik 8 years ago. Oops, that didn't work out very well - the pattern of failures and shareholder value destruction started many years ago and clearly continues.

But hey, let's join the helium / hydrogen bandwagon / bubble and keep this show on the road. The fact that 80M are unlikely to ever commercialise these resources doesn't seem to matter to some people. If the resources actually exist in any commercially viable amount by the time 80M got anywhere near commercialising them existing shareholders will be diluted to oblivion. I expect yet ANOTHER dilutive fund raise by year end. Unfortunately the market is wising up to 80M's business practices and so any funds raised will likely be paltry, as evidenced by the last fund raise. Some people have commented that such raises may have led to forward selling, that wouldn't suprise me in the least - so Jay's / 80M's selected participants benefit but, once again, existing shareholders lose out. Rinse and repeat.

If you'd like your question(s) answered may I suggest you read my previous posts mikey; hint - I've not been 'burnt'. To correct you - I don't laugh at the misfortune of others; I laugh at the content of some posts - that's clearly 2 entirely different perperspectives. Come on, lighten up - you must admit wild speculations of a price target for the day of 0.50p and 'a big rise' are amusing - in the very same way that I would find an opposing negative view speculating a price target of 0.20p and 'a big fall' to be equally amusing. Both are pointless rubbish with no other purpose than to promote the individual posters hopes and wishes for the share price. But, as I say, I do like a laugh.

Good luck with your investment and good luck with your wishes for a JV, although I'm still waiting for the much hyped Kobold JV to bring anything meaningful to the table. All I've seen is more shareholder value destruction since that was announced.

Spoilt for choice for laughable posts today - I do like a day that makes me laugh, good for the blood pressure.

0.50p today?

Going to be a big rise.

Took some at .34/35

Bring on the monster that is Disko!!!

this is another great RNS from the BOD

Expect a big jump this morning

Hold for gold!

Keep'em coming - thanks, they're all very amusing :-)

Proximity to Pulsair is of no benefit, that's been covered on Jay thread already. Two entirely different geological areas.

Pulsair about to list on AIM only because (much like Jay / 80M) the investors on the 2 exchanges it is already listed on are getting wise to their BS and lack of prospects to actually ever make any money. They now hope to convince PIs on AIM what a great investment the company is - NOT.

Within 9 weeks of saying there wouldn't be a fund raise (true to their longstanding form) Jay had yet another dilutive fund raise. And there's another known 21% dilution expected for the purchase of WF.

Today ES tells us

'We have only begun to scratch the surface at Outokumpu. We are committed to accelerating our work program......'

That sounds expensive. And if Disko is actually to be drilled in 2025 (doubtful) then 80M will soon have to raise enough funds to match Kobold's share of the costs for that - that was estimated to be $11.6m. Oh, and don't forget all the other planned works and usual running costs. I'm speculating yet another fund raise by year end (or before) as the last raise isn't going to be very thinly spread covering all of the projects 80M reckons it's going to progress.

Todays laugh - 'fingers crossed, he is now true to his words,'

Well Eric broke his word within 9 days of statement, Jay have repeatedly stated they have non-dilutive plans only to then repeatedly then do dilutive fund raises. But of course, this time it will be different ;-)

Ashton - glad you've now corrected the erroneous quote that you stated I'd posted recently, despite a claim that you were diligent. You seem to be fascinated by whether or not I hold Jay shares - despite the obvious fact that it is entirely irrelevant. I've already addressed your misconceptions regarding your supposition as to my share holdings but to repeat, and in reply to your post.

Might not a shrewd investor (who maybe not already holding?) have bought shares around the 0.265 lows during the week prior to my post on the 2nd May? My post on the 2nd May states that I didn't consider that to be a good time to be buying Jay shares and that personally I wouldn't be buying any (more?) shares until good news appeared. Whatever you think you've inferred from the sentiment of my post on the 2nd May is clearly nothing more than more of your imaginative speculation. Well done you. Do you know whether or not I currently own shares? Do you know exactly when I bought and sold any shares? No, you don't. That's just how I like it.

All that aside, might not an equally shrewd investor alter their opinion as time passes and the available info changes? Although your own opinion of Jay never waivers some of us constantly adapt our positions to suit the ebb and flow of Jay's antics.

I see that (as is your usual tactic) rather than answering / addressing direct questions or facts you instead attempt deflection and misdirection. Why not answer the points I raised in my last post?

Ashton, surely your agenda is to ramp Jay SP, you are desperate to recover the 95% loss you have suffered in the value of your primary holding. Your 'unflinching belief' was initially in Dundas was it not? Until, oh dear, that went belly up. Now you have switched allegiance to Disko. If drill results for Disko aren't as good as you anticipate no doubt your 'unflinching bellieve' will switch again. Good luck on getting the 'decent return' you talk about - you'll need an approximate 30 fold increase in the SP to recover a 95% loss. With more dilutions needed / expected is that a realistic target? I don't think so.

When you say 'bash RM' do you / can you dispute the facts posted? No, you don't / can't - because the facts are there for everyone to see. You may blinker yourself to past SP decimation and loss of shareholder value and kid yourself that 'this time it will be different' but the facts speak for themselves. Investor bias is one of the worst traits for an investor to possess, as is a believe that 'this time it will be different'. Fine, you are entitled to your believes (and good luck to you) but some of us do not suffer from those traits and post an alternative fact based perspective - you interpret that as bashing RM. Why do you not dispute the individual facts posted (as I've requested you to do so on more than one occasion) rather than just accuse people of bashing RM when they have an alternative view to yourself? Go on, try and illustrate that RM's tenure at Jay (and several other companies) has been beneficial for shareholder value - I can't wait for your post.

Timing of admission of new shares almost certainly of no relevance to SP. This was a private placing and (as BIDA have pointed out) the SP fell in the days before the placing was announced. This would suggest some forward selling may have occurred. Anybody knowing they were going to buy shares at 0.003 might have forward sold shares to take advantage of the prevailing higher price. As is usual, small private investors get stuffed but a select group of people prosper. Those wanting to sell their newly acquired shares have probably already done so - at higher prices. But of course, some folks maintain that RM and the BoD are doing a wonderful job and will enhance shareholder value - you only need to look at the decline of shareholder value at other companies where they have been directors to see how that is likely to play out.

well for those that don't have access to ************* you should be aware that more letters from the us group have been published by tw. far from letting this issue fade away it looks like bida and tw have got the bit between his teeth and are pursueing matters. i now not what legal merit their case has or indeed what chances it has of success but jay's rather indifferent attitude to all the matters raised isn't doing it any favours. bida raises some very important matters, matters and actions that are of interest to all jay shareholders and matters that jay and its bod need to account for and to be accountable for. interesting times ahead, buckle up.

Ashton - thank you for being concerned enough about me to question my posts. But, oh dear, you've sunk to a new low. 5 minutes ago you bid me good bye yet here you are clearly still concerned by my posts and actions - poor you, you do have my sympathy. But thank you for reading all of my posts so diligently, I do hope they are helping you to realise that your faith in Jay and it's BoD is misplaced - although I somehow doubt anything will shift your opinion, you illustrate probably the worst case of investor bias I have ever witnessed.

So to your post; other than showing how puerile your posts have become what exactly has your post illustrated? In your haste to post something negative about me you obviously haven't DILIGENTLY read my post of the 2nd May. I did not write '….buy INTO Jay…' as you state I did. Actually, you kindly reproduced my post 'verbatim' - I suggest you re-read it.

Might not a shrewd investor (who maybe not already holding?) have bought shares around the 0.265 lows during the week prior to my post on the 2nd May? My post on the 2nd May states that I didn't consider that to be a good time to be buying Jay shares and that personally I wouldn't be buying any (more?) shares until good news appeared. Whatever you think you've inferred from the sentiment of my post on the 2nd May is clearly nothing more than more of your imaginative speculation. Well done you. Do you know whether or not I currently own shares? Do you know exactly when I bought and sold any shares? No, you don't. That's just how I like it.

All that aside, might not an equally shrewd investor alter their opinion as time passes and the available info changes? Although your own opinion of Jay never waivers some of us constantly adapt our positions to suit the ebb and flow of Jay's antics.

But, purely for a bit of fun, do tell us what you think my present holding is and your reasons for your guess.

investace - so very pleased that you have given my post the accolade of being 'fair and balanced'; the opinion of an unbiased, diligent, polite and courteous observer such as yourself means a lot :-)

i'm quite happy with what i get for my £6.99 month sub to *************, do you think i care if i'm the only subscriber? only, as you know, i'm not - for one there's exeost as you have stated - that's at least 2 :-)

you should read my previous posts much more diligently - i do not state if i hold, buy or sell - do please share your wisdom and tell us why you think i don't currently hold. or of what relevance it is.

for someone who claims 'my english [compared to my mathematics] is terrible' your maths is pretty atrocious too - the lowest price for jay on the 28/6 was 0.003 and the highest reached on the 2/7 was 0.00725 - i think you'll find that's around 150% gain, half of the 300% you state. regarding the same post; again you really should be more diligent and check your facts before you post - you claim i disappeared for 2 weeks around the 1/7, when actually i posted on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and then on the 11th. my posts throughout that time never waivered from my long held believe that jay is a poor investment and a poorly run company. as i said at the time the board became a farce, all the new rampers saying how much higher the sp was going to go and how many shares they'd bought and how brilliant jay's prospects were and every other bs reason they could think of to ramp the sp. all i had to do was take a little more profit, sit back and wait for the sp spike to deflate, just like it always does. rampers are so predictable and because of them the see-saw sp will perpetuate. doesn't change my opinion of jay one iota though.

investace

gosh - you do seem to despise tw rather a lot. you state

'this scum bag slanders everyone and anyone'

that doesn't really concur with fact. fact is - can you illustrate any recent (lets say the last 20 years) successful actions of slander against tw? can you illustrate any actions of slander against tw? as he is such a high profile character who, as a journalist, has written multiple stories (on a daily basis) about the questionable occurences for many a company and who (you claim) 'slanders everyone and anyone' surely it's inconceivable that there hasn't been an avalanche of cases brought against him. slander is only slander if it is a false statement - doesn't look like he's written many false statements to me.

for the record - i have nothing to do with tw other than subsribe to *************, which has several contributors as well as tw. as i've said previously, i do like to gain company info from all available sites - ************* has been (and is) often extremely helpful. dismissing it makes one blind to a lot of extremely useful info.

The most recent letter contains several points of interest

RM's violation of market abuse regulations for not disclosing details of his share sale for 15months - regulations clearly state 3 days. The late notification occured after receipt of a Letter Before Action.

The payment of £millions into 'various directors' consultancy companies'

Reference to the WF purchase as a scam

Unusually high levels of trading and a price drop in the days immediately prior to placings

Accusation of 'lies and misrepresentations'.

This appears to be nothing more than the grumblings of some US shareholders that have lost money investing in Jay. Whether they pursue their claims further or whether they have indeed any valid legal argument to do so remains to be seen. They do however raise several pertinent questions relating to the conduct of one or more of the Jay BoD and it's general governance - I don't think its a particularly good look for a company hoping to attract credible partners and 'official' sources of funds.

Ashton - I completely understand; my views on Jay and it's BoD have been proven to be correct. Your opposing posts, loyalty to and faith in Jay have again been shown to be misplaced. Naturally, you don't wish to enter into any further debate - why expose yourself to the risk of being proven wrong yet again. Shame that - I'll miss our little bouts of opposition.

I find it quite bizarre that you state 'I am not interested in the answers to any of these questions, not even an iota…..'. You repeatedly state your belief in hydrogen and helium exploitation at Jameson and that you expect Jay to be partnered there but yet the enormous difficulties that WILL be faced in attempting to exploit these resources is of no importance to you! Trust me, any company of any substance will be very much concerned with those difficulties - they may prove to be economically insurmountable and Jameson will not be exploited.

I don't think the value of your Jay shares will recover during 2025 - if you sell I think you'll be crystalising your loss that we've often talked about. I somehow very much doubt 2025 will be quite as fruitful as you think it will - it'll almost certainly go the way of many other date / target / projection issued by Jay. So they've said they will be starting the field work - great, but where's the rest of the money to match Kobold in the actual drill (if it happens)? Where's the money to proof up Jameson? Where's the money for all the other projects? Where's the money (due during 2024) they are committed to pay to maintain licences? Etc etc etc.

Oh, and now we learn that apparently there are rumours that several disgruntled US investors are making some pretty serious allegations against some Jay BoD members. These claims apparently relate to Jay releasing misleading information - fancy that? Apparently the BoD received relevant letters months ago but the market hasn't been informed. During this time more than one fund raise has occurred, surely the market should of been advised if the BoD were aware of such an action? Any such claims (if they do in fact exist) may be entirely without merit but if the claims are rigorously pursued a lot of the money just raised may go in paying legal fees or maybe settling any such claims. I do hope these claims prove to be either false or without merit but either way - good luck with your plan to sell in 2025.

Well I didn't have to wait long for todays giggle - apparently the raise was a 'Clever Raise' - nearly fell off my chair laughing at that one. What's 'clever' about it?

Apparently (according to the same poster) there's going to be some great news out soon which will elevate the SP. Would it not be 'clever' to wait until then - surely less shares would be have to be issued to raise the same amount of money?

What great news could be coming? Nothing is my guess. If the BoD were sitting on / expecting price sensitive news surely they would not legally be able to participate in the fund raise - unless I'm mistaken?

What's 'clever' about being down to your last few pounds in the bank and desperately HAVING to raise money? Nothing that I can see. There's no partners ready to throw in cash, there's no sources of funds throwing in cash and there's no one interested in buying any of your assets.

Even after the latest fund raise Jay are NOT fully funded, in fact far from it. More dilution beckons before the year end. How is yet ANOTHER hugely dilutive raise for a tiny fraction of your impending commitments 'clever'?

What's 'clever' about repeatedly telling your shareholders that a dilutive fund raise would not be needed only to go ahead and conduct one within 10 days of your last such assurance. I' suggest its NOT 'clever' to alienate your shareholders and future partners by repeatedly issuing misleading statements.

There's nothing clever about yet more destruction of shareholder value.