Member Info for RachT2

“Why is 80M's partner having a raise to fund Jameson a bad thing for 80M?”

Really? Let’s admire this textbook success story…

A partner that explicitly stated it would fund the initial multi-million dollar drilling programme… now looking to raise funds within weeks of IPO. Stellar.

~90% redemptions — i.e. 9 out of 10 SPAC investors took one look and headed for the exit. Encouraging.

Trust reduced from ~$86m to ~$10–11m — financial firepower absolutely decimated. Even better.

And now… straight back to the market with the begging bowl.

All perfectly normal of course. Happens all the time — ring the bell one week, pass the hat around the next. LOL.

Then we have the promotional narrative — vast reserves, low costs, easy logistics, rapid timelines. If even half of that were near-term credible, you’d think they might wait for a drill result (or at least spud) and raise at a higher valuation. But no — straight in early, likely with dilution, warrants and a nice bit of overhang. Another fantastic look.

We’re also told this is a “retail-focused” story and institutional backing isn’t required. Of course — because most companies actively avoid deep-pocketed, long-term investors… said no serious company ever. It does make you wonder whether that demand actually exists. Funny how the narrative has shifted — not long ago we were told US institutions would be piling in. Now apparently they’re optional. Convenient.

And just to round it off — raising money doesn’t equal success. It simply means more money is needed before anything has been proven. The drills still need to happen, still need to find something commercial, and still need significant further capital and infrastructure beyond that.

So yes, funding is part of the game. But a partner going back to the market almost immediately after listing, following massive redemptions and after telling everyone the project was already funded… well, what’s not to like? 🤣

If anything, it raises more questions than it answers. And so far, the market seems to be forming its own view — which doesn’t exactly align with the RC narrative.

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

Smell the coffee yet?

My thanks again to Damers - here's a copy of their first post bringing this bombshell to our attention, it's still only showing 3 recommendations as I write. For anyone that hasn’t read the SEC filings from yesterday (it is hard going) this summary from StockTitans sums it up pretty well. But of course, the RC will be desperately trying to put a positive spin on it, deflecting or attempting to discredit my posts - probably all 3. Shame I won't be reading most of their nonsense - I've got most filtered. LOL.

Greenland Energy Company is conducting a mixed securities offering and resale registration under a Form S-1. The company plans a primary sale of approximately 8,101,852 shares of common stock and/or Pre-funded Warrants, together with 8,101,852 Common Warrants, targeting about $70 million in gross proceeds at an assumed price of $8.64 per share. At the same time, it is registering the resale of 14,196,822 shares of common stock held by existing investors, most of which are subject to lockup agreements.

Before the offering, 26,155,232 common shares are outstanding, rising to 34,257,084 shares after the deal, assuming full exercise of Pre-funded Warrants and no warrant exercises. The proceeds are earmarked mainly for general corporate purposes and to support exploration of the Jameson Land Basin in East Greenland, where the company controls over 2 million gross acres and has independent estimates of about 13 billion barrels of 3U gross un-risked prospective recoverable oil.

Form S-1 funds high-risk Greenland exploration while adding dilution.

Greenland Energy is raising about $70 million via a primary issuance of 8.1 million shares or Pre-funded Warrants with 8.1 million accompanying Common Warrants. This capital is intended to fund early-stage drilling in the Jameson Land Basin, a frontier Arctic oil play with no current production.

The same registration covers resale of 14.2 million existing shares, enabling early holders to sell once lockups expire. Common shares outstanding are expected to increase from 26.2 million to 34.3 million after the offering, not including warrant exercises, which could add further dilution over time.

Prospective resources are sizable—Sproule ERCE estimates about 13 billion barrels (3U gross un-risked)—but remain undiscovered and high risk. Future results will depend on whether wells like OPW-1, OPW-6 and OPW-9, targeted around 2026, demonstrate commercially viable reserves under challenging Greenlandic regulatory and operating conditions.

https://www.stocktitan.net/sec-filings/GLND/s-1-greenland-energy-co-files-ipo-registration-statement-1784272af2fb.html

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

Ashton

You still haven’t addressed the key points — instead, it’s the usual deflection. For clarity, here are the questions again:

If the outlook for 80M is as strong as suggested, and ES was such a key part of the story, why exit at this stage?

There’s also been no comment from you on the apparent lack of confirmed funding at USFM — any thoughts on that?

And while we’re at it, the recent fundraise announcement hasn’t exactly drawn a response either. Nothing to add there?

You’ve suggested I’ve underestimated RM — I’m genuinely interested to understand why you think that, but so far there’s been little in the way of a constructive explanation.

If there are solid counterpoints, I’m all ears. Otherwise, it does rather feel like the pattern repeats — avoid the substance, look only to the future and continue your promoting.

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

Cheshirebull

So you've not read the SEC filings then? Or read it and not understood it? Another thorough, articulate and insightful post from you. ROFL.

Here's the link

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2093507/000182912626003406/greenlandenergy_s1.htm

Makes you think what'll happen to the price on Monday doesn't it? No sure I'd be glad holding such a large position - still, you're in this for the long term so its irrelevant apparently. LOL.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

All IMHO, of course.

Continued.....

This is remarkably similar to the 80M playbook - optimistic ​assurances that turn out to be over optimistic assurances. Peas in a pod.

Robert Price is still talking about "hundreds of holes" and "2 million barrels a day," but he can't even get one rig drilling in Greenland without diluting current shareholders within 2 weeks of IPO.

​Will the October drill proceed?

I'd rather not be the liquidity for the insiders' exit.

The "Free Carry" looks like it ain’t free after all.

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

My thanks to Damers for posting the link - and despite its brevity I’m taken aback that there's no comments yet and only a few recommendations. Are people awake here? Or do most only listen to what rubbish the ramping crew churn out? I see there are some green filtered posts as well - the usual suspects missing the truly important event and concentrating on dross as usual.

Now, at the outset, I STRESS that I’m no expert in reading US SEC files, including S1’s, but this looks pretty ominous to me. I’d appreciate any correction or clarification if I’ve misunderstood or misinterpreted anything and posted any inaccuracies.

I think you’ll find this is a prospectus for a HUGE FUND RAISE. Yes, that's right - its only 2 weeks since IPO and a few days since they rang the bell. WoopieDo. Ding dong! Despite being told by all in the RC, RP etc that the first 2 drills would be fully funded by MarchGL it looks very much like the situation has changed.

​

The Form S-1 filed on April 10, 2026, appears to have finally stripped away the "fully funded" veneer we’ve been fed since the merger announcement.

We were told March GL would fund the first two wells to earn their 70% stake. But look at the numbers:

​The Redemption: Approximately 90% of Pelican (PELI) shareholders hit the exit button in March, draining the trust from ~$88M down to a measly $10–$11M.

​

The Conclusion: March GL clearly doesn't have the "private" funds to bridge that gap. If they did, surely they wouldn't be begging the public for $70 million just two weeks after listing.

If funds are not required in the near term why raise now? If the prospects were as much a certainty as the RC, RP etc keep telling us they would surely wait until at least the spud or for positive news before attempting to raise funds.

​2. A Discount to the IPO Price

Remember when the "fair value" was supposed to be $10.00+?

​The new raise is being pitched at an illustrative price of $8.64 per share.

​But the current price sits below that level already - so might they raise less or issue even more shares?

​

To make it worse, they are bundling these cheap shares with warrants, creating even more long-term downward pressure.

​3. The Insider Exit Ramp

This is also an alarming part of the S-1. The company isn't just raising new cash; it is registering the resale of 14,196,822 shares for "selling stockholders."

​While lock-ups are in place, this filing is the administrative "green light" for early backers, insiders, and merger partners to start offloading their paper as soon as they are able.

​The Overhang: With the new shares issued for the fund raise, the 14M insider shares and new warrants doesn’t that indicate the possibility for some downward pressure on the share price?

Continued.........

Ashton

Thanks for your reply, but seriously, is that it? How was I being selective? He has left the company and is doing some consultancy work for them. You are such a pedant.

You haven't addressed the question I posed regarding Eric's departure -

“That raises a fair question — if the outlook for 80M is as strong as suggested, or if he was such a key part of the story, why exit at this stage?”

Nothing to say?

And I also note you've made no comment about the apparent lack of funds at USFM? Tick tock tick tock.

Your selective silence speaks volumes.

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

SilerFoxd

Agree – all fair points. I can certainly follow your reasoning, thanks for posting the perspective. Let’s hope for a favourable outcome from here.

Ashton – well, well… I’m not capable of “basic research.” ROFL. I think you may have taken what was an obvious rhetorical point rather too literally. For clarity, this is straight from the company RNS dated 30/01/26:

“the company confirms that Managing Director Eric Sondergaard’s LAST DAY will be 10 February 2026.” (emphasis mine).

“LAST DAY” seems fairly unambiguous to me. What part of LAST DAY are you not understanding?

If we’re going to be a pedant and split hairs, yes, the announcement notes he may remain on a consultancy basis. However, he is no longer a director, employee, or member of staff—so in any meaningful sense, he has left 80M.

Oh, and the original notification states -

‘’Subject to completion of funding for USFM Corporation ("USFM"), it is expected that Eric will join the board of US-based USFM in due course.’’

Looks like funding hasn't been sorted yet - I’ve not heard that Eric has joined the board of USFM yet - have you? So when exactly is Disko going to be drilled? Presumably after they’ve obtained the funds to do so. Tick tock tick tock.

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

SilverFoxd

‘’So all in all, ES and RM have pulled off the deal of the century,...’’.

I may be overthinking it, but I’d agree — but for different reasons. It does appear that both have positioned themselves into roles with potentially greater upside and access to larger resources - a great deal.

In ES’s case, hasn’t he now stepped away from 80M altogether? That raises a fair question — if the outlook for 80M is as strong as suggested, or if he was such a key part of the story, why exit at this stage?

It’s also worth noting the timing — these new roles appear to have been secured after the award of options and the establishment of what some shareholders have viewed as a generous EBT structure. The sequence of events may be coincidental, but it does add another layer of optics that investors may wish to consider.

Furthermore, those new roles don’t appear to be directly dependent on delivering increased shareholder value at 80M, which again raises questions around alignment of incentives.

There may well be perfectly valid explanations, but from the outside it does prompt a degree of scepticism. It’s one of those situations where the optics don’t entirely align with the narrative being presented.

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

Wow - you live and learn - I never knew that the actions of a single MM could have such far reaching effects - looks like even the US market is being influenced by a single MM here in little ol' blighty. ROFL.

A member of the RC posts the usual nonsense -

''bid this mm needs to politely **** off

at some point we will break free of therm

and their disgraceful switching play''

Must be why GLND is going nowhere too.

Hilarious. Desperate. Claptrap.

SilverFoxd / Ashton

I’ve been flagging the web of interconnected companies and directors across the 80M structure for some time now, and it remains a concern for me — particularly when it comes to potential conflicts of interest.

The three flagship projects — GS, Disko and JL — are all linked not just at company level, but also through overlapping director involvement. That in itself isn’t necessarily improper, but it does raise legitimate questions when transactions occur between related parties.

Take JL as a clear example. RM is widely seen as a key figure representing 80M’s interests. However, if and when 80M looks to offload its remaining stake (c.30%), GLND would seem an obvious potential buyer.

That’s where the conflict question arises. RM also has a significant interest in GLND, and — as has been pointed out by others — the value and upside of that holding may outweigh his position in 80M. If that’s the case, there is an obvious tension:

- Maximising value for 80M shareholders would imply securing the highest possible sale price for the JL stake

- Maximising value via GLND would favour acquiring that same stake as cheaply as possible

Those two objectives don’t naturally align.

I’m not suggesting anything improper is taking place, but it does underline the importance of robust governance, transparency, and genuinely independent oversight in any such transaction. Given past concerns raised by shareholders around generous option issuance and incentive structures, it’s particularly important that any deal is seen to be conducted on a fully arm’s-length basis, with clear alignment to 80M shareholder interests. Without that, questions will inevitably remain over whether outcomes are being optimised for all investors.

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

Some bulls have gone quiet recently.

Where’s Ashton? I hope he’s alright. Haven’t seen a post from him in the last few days. And how are you fairing Cheshirebull? Can’t be good having such an enormous holding lose almost 40% of its value. Recent peak 1.55 now 0.92. More Shiraz sir? Still, you were both correct all along and my predictions have always been pure folly. Oh no, that's right - I was correct - see the spike? But of course, you're both LTHs; so a 40% drop In value is irrelevant. LOL.

If you still read the board; well done Chirpycheep - enjoy your profits. Try to convince the missus that it really is worth re-investing in this company - as long as you watch for the peaks and troughs the ramping crew and the BoD create and maybe don't invest quite as much as you did previously 😉 I fully understand if you want to walk away altogether - but, like me, you do have an awful lot of knowledge and experience of this company and it would be such a waste if you didn’t use that to your advantage. Good luck whatever you decide to do - and, as you said, no hard feelings.

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

See what I did there? 🤣

Both 80M and GLND down ~10% as I write. Sub-$7 for GLND next? Quite the contrast to the “script” we were assured would play out.

Strange, isn’t it — the market doesn’t seem to be buying into the bullish narrative. Although, of course, I’m sure it’s the MMs’ fault… again. Nothing to do with sentiment or fundamentals, obviously.

Interestingly, it does seem to be following a rather familiar pattern — a ramp-driven spike into the event, followed by a retrace in the days after. I seem to recall mentioning that possibility some time ago. LOL.

As for some of the recent gems:

“Good time to get in ahead of the bell ringing ceremony…”

“Expect US investors to pile in…”

“Massive awareness… substantial inflows…”

Even references to who might be “watching from the sidelines”…

All very exciting — just not particularly evident in the price action. Luckily some of us didn't fall for the RC’s nonsense and have sold at higher prices. But, of course, now we are labelled “not proper holders”. Hilarious.

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

Edit - while I was writing this GLND has dropped below $7 - ding dong. That extra bit of PR really did make a difference.

Chipsta

I think you’ve misunderstood me — I’m not saying anyone has bought a “duffer.” The simple truth is none of us know how this plays out for 80M. There may be value here. That’s not the issue.

My issue — and it always has been — is the relentless overhyping from the RC and, at times, certain BoD commentary that stretches credibility. It might create nice tradable spikes (which I’ve happily taken advantage of), but it’s no way to build trust in a business.

This is a pattern, not a one-off. For years it’s been the same script:

Big promises

Inflated asset narratives

Over-optimistic timelines

And then… delays, misses, or silence

Meanwhile, shareholders fund the gap.

And here we are again:

Five timelines for the first well — still not drilled

Multiple GS “restart” dates — still not operating

Now talk of production within two years — on what basis?

Claims around huge production levels and ultra-low costs — before proving a single commercial well

Then there’s the headline valuation — $92m — effectively derived from a notional transaction involving a partner, not from proven, producing assets.

And the logistics? Largely glossed over. Infrastructure, export routes, Arctic conditions — all non-trivial, all expensive, all time-consuming. Yet somehow they don’t seem to dent the optimistic projections of a break even less than that of the Permian basin in Texas. And a production / export figure of 1.5 - 2m boe per day? To get to anywhere near those figures, guestimates of cost of infrastructure vary from $50bn to $100bn - I'm pretty sure that'll raise the headline breakeven figure somewhat. Oh, and for quite a few months of the year won't we need a permanent fleet of nuclear-powered or heavy ice-class tankers and a deep-water port (that doesn't currently exist). But, of course, they come pretty cheap and won't affect the break even costs by much. Not!

None of this means there isn’t upside — but it does mean expectations are being set at levels that history suggests are unlikely to be met / or on the timelines suggested.

That’s the real issue. Not the assets — the messaging.

Underpromise and overdeliver builds credibility.

Overpromise and underdeliver destroys it.

Unfortunately, this still looks very much like the latter.

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

And todays comedy has started already

This from one of the RC who repeatedly ramped the Nasdaq listing and merger - and some ‘’investors’’ have actually recommended this nonsense. ROFL.

“Also people need to stio thinking the greenland energy price is effect this share, it makes ZERO difference to 80m. Our 30% stake of Jameson is in the land, a real asset, not GLND.”

“Zero difference”? Hilarious. Desperate. Contradictory.

So we've gone from a US listing being crucial to now making “zero difference”. You couldn't make this rubbish up. It's truly farcical.

FYI - the GLND price has EVERYTHING to do with 80M and its own share price and future, they are intrinsically linked. If anyone cannot see that, or claims otherwise, they either haven’t got a clue or are attempting to mislead others.

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

Strange how no one else has mentioned the delay dropped in RP’s last ‘’advertorial’’. Is anyone else getting a sense of déjà vu?

Two days ago, Robert Price (GLND CEO) dropped another timeline update in his latest interview, now pointing to October 2026 for the first spud at Jameson Land. For those keeping score at home, I think this is the fifth different "definitive" window we’ve been given since the merger was announced. Of course the RC were keen to regurgitate those earlier assurances.

Let’s look at the "Progressive Delay" we've seen just since last September:

Sept 2025: "Late 2025 / Early 2026" (The IPO hype phase)

Jan 2026: "Spring/Summer 2026" (The first reality check)

Feb 2026: "H2 2026" (The vague safety net)

Mar 2026: "Late Summer" (Post-merger "confidence")

April 2026: "October" (The latest slide)

This is starting to look like the classic 80 Mile (formerly Bluejay) playbook. Long-term holders know the routine: aggressive optimism, "world-class" resource claims (13 billion barrels!), and a timeline that proves to be over optimistic.

The Cash Burn: Every month this slides is another month of NASDAQ listing fees, management salaries, and "logistics planning" without a single bit of data from the ground.

Sentiment vs. Reality: Price talks about "hundreds of holes" and "major oil company market caps," but we are still waiting on Well #1. The market is clearly sniffing this out; notice how the post-merger "squeeze" & ‘’BOOOMMMM!!!!’’ that the RC promised has instead turned into a slow bleed toward $8.00.

Bottom Line: We’ve gone from "drilling soon" to "landing gear in August" to "spudding in October." It's starting to seem that the "free carry" from March GL appears to be being managed with the same "jam tomorrow" over optimistic sentiment that has contributed to keeping 80 Mile’s share price in the gutter for years.

Stop giving us interviews - start matching the timelines / assurances already stated. Until then, "October" is just another moving target.

Underpromise and overdeliver — it’s a shame that approach still isn’t being followed here.

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

Zzzzz…

Well, I must be one of those “loyal investors” — I actually tuned in. Having traded this on and off for years, I’d say that assures my standing as a “loyal investor” - probably more so than some of the more recent arrivals.

Another one for the “nothing new whatsoever” archive — plenty of airtime, very little substance. Impressive consistency, if nothing else. I recall the RC making quite a lot of noise about the Netflix “connection” and the supposed production quality it would bring. Oddly, I didn’t see much evidence of that here.

There was also another small “clarification moment” — RP suggesting they’d reach 70% after just the first drill. That’s not my understanding; I thought both wells were required to get to that level.

As for the oversized photo accompanying the video — interesting choice. I didn't recognise it. It didn’t seem to quite match the current version we saw talking on screen, he looked somewhat older and appeared to have less hair . Perhaps the profile photo is due for an update?

And did anyone catch a mention of 80M? I didn’t — though, to be fair, attention does tend to wander when there’s not a great deal being said.

All in all, another highly informative session… if you’re a fan of repetition.

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

Much as I appreciate RP’s efforts, it’s starting to feel a bit overdone — arguably edging into desperation. How many “interviews,” streams and recordings have there been now?

And GatewatchMedia? A YouTube channel with 19 subscribers and only five videos prior to this — now six, with PELI / GLND making up a sizeable proportion of their entire content. Not exactly Bloomberg. With another appearance apparently lined up days later, it does raise questions about the intended audience.

Which leads to the obvious point — why the constant promotion? Why the desperation for coverage? Anyone of real scale or institutional interest is unlikely to be sourcing information from channels like this; they tend to rely on recognised analysts and formal coverage. This type of output feels very much geared toward retail rather than larger capital.

Given recent price action, it’s also fair to question how effective these appearances actually are. More of the same doesn’t appear to be moving the dial.

At this stage, the emphasis arguably needs to shift from promotion to delivery. If the underlying story is as strong as suggested, the results will speak for themselves — and capital, institutional or otherwise, will follow. Until then, the steady stream of advertorial-style content doesn’t seem to be adding much.

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

In the run-up to this, the ramping crew (RC) were very clear in their messaging:

US investors would be piling into PELI

More buying would follow once the merger was confirmed

GNLD would see strong demand on listing

Institutions would be lining up for both

What actually played out was somewhat different:

Redemptions at a very high level (~86%)

PELI exited with little of the anticipated “BOOOMMMM!!!!!!”

GNLD spiking heavily pre-open (circa +200%) — which was a huge signal to sell 80M as it too appeared to be peaking.

A fairly muted reception post-listing

Share price now materially lower (sub-$8 at time of writing)

No PIPE announced

Limited evidence of institutional participation

Make of that what you will, but it does highlight the gap between ramptastic opinion and outcome.

What’s perhaps more telling is how any dissenting view along the way was met — often with ridicule, deflection, or attempts to discredit rather than engage with the substance. And, of course, those taking profits were labelled as “not real investors.” Hilarious.

The pattern feels familiar — strong narratives, repeated with conviction, sometimes across multiple boards, followed by a rather different reality.

Hopefully, readers take note of certain names and apply their own judgement going forward. I suspect things may go a little quiet from the usual suspects in the near term, but I wouldn’t expect that to last — those narratives have a habit of reappearing the moment anything remotely positive comes into view, particularly from those in the RC that are still holding, or trying to get back to break-even.

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

Wow -

” 🚀Get ready for a HUGE DAY here! 🚀” - several days later I'm still waiting

“Book about to flip to teens” - will that prediction be as accurate as the HUGE DAY prediction? Probably.

“Should be no holding this back now” - no? I think you've forgotten all about market sentiment

“Mad week we have had but the huge buys tell the story” - you do not know if a trade is a buy or a sell, you (like everyone else) can only guess.

“MM allowed the rope lowering I expect they too were buying” - based on? Evidence?

“ready for the surge back up” - again, let's hope this is more accurate than all the many many other inaccurate predictions you've made

“No reasom for this drop whatsoever and certainly went against the chart” - that's right, the market is wrong, it hasn't focussed on just the positives, silly market eh?

All IMHO, of course.