Member Info for ragingcow38

Thanks all — useful contributions. Quick, factual next steps so we can stop arguing and start calculating:

SilverMoon — that quoted extract is exactly the primary text we need. Please post the direct RNS link or the RNS title and date for that quote and paste the exact resource table lines (tonnes, grades, ZnEq, 19.1 Moz) so everyone can verify.

Dofmeister — the corporate presentation is helpful context. Please point to the exact slide number that shows the 19m oz / zinc figures and state which RNS it cites (title/date). A slide is secondary until we can trace it to the underlying RNS.

Lazarus2 — fair point about doing DD. I will. If you’ve already pulled the RNSs, paste the links/excerpts you used (recoverable ounces, recovery %, capex/opex, dilution assumptions) and I’ll turn them into a clear per‑share sensitivity table.

Once the RNS excerpts are posted I’ll convert the resource numbers into a worked sensitivity table for silver at $75 / $100 / $150 (and germanium if the RNS gives Ge figures), showing per‑share outcomes after simple recovery, NSR/payability, capex and a 5% buyer‑capture example. Post the RNS excerpts and I’ll run the numbers.

Vote up if you want a useful board vs ,,,

Thanks — the corporate presentation is useful context. Please post the exact slide number and the RNS title/date that the presentation cites for the 19m oz and zinc figures.

A PDF slide is secondary; anyone can only run a per‑share sensitivity table once we have the primary RNS numbers (recoverable ounces, recovery %, capex/opex and any dilution/funding notes).

Upvote if you want evidence‑led posts to be prioritised.

Thanks for the pointers, but please post the specific RNS(s) that contain the 19m oz and zinc data (title and date or link). A YouTube explainer and an X post don’t replace primary filings. Post the RNS excerpts and convert those figures into a per‑share sensitivity table for $75/$100/$150 silver.

Thanks for the rec and for expanding on your view — useful to see the thinking. A few factual points and requests so the thread can move from opinion to a verifiable valuation:

• Show the RNS references you used for the 19 million oz silver figure and the zinc numbers (link each RNS).

• Your £1.4bn / $1.9bn calc needs context — that’s gross in‑ground metal value, not company equity value. Please show the steps you used to convert gross metal value into a per‑share figure: assumed recoverable ounces, metallurgical recovery, payability, net smelter return, capex, opex, taxes, and assumed dilution.

• Explain the “take 5%” rule — why 5% (buyer capture) and how you apply it to get to 0.4p per share. Show the arithmetic.

• Zinc pays capex claim — post the basis for that (zinc tonnes, assumed price, recovery, and capex estimate).

• Funding and dilution — you say the current campaign is fully funded and farm‑outs will avoid dilution. Please post the RNS or company statement that confirms funding status and any farm‑out agreements or terms.

• Revenue from Australian assets — if you expect revenue, post the farm‑out/RNS that supports timing and likely receipts.

All good to be bullish, but the board needs worked numbers or primary sources, not just headline multipliers. If you post the RNS links I’m sure someone here can run the per‑share math and post the result. Upvote if you want evidence‑led posts to be prioritised.

Good macro context and thanks for sharing your view. If you think 0.4p is a bargain, please post the valuation steps you used: assumed recoverable ounces, grade, recovery, capex, opex, discount rate, and per‑metal price assumptions. Also show a sensitivity table (e.g., per‑share value at silver $75/$100/$150 and germanium at current vs doubled prices). A note on how you treat dilution and funding needs would be useful too. Without those numbers this reads as a reasonable opinion, not a verifiable valuation. Upvote if you want more evidence‑led posts in this thread.

FMR LLC has reported a change in its major holding in Essentra plc, crossing a threshold on February 13, 2026. The total voting rights held by FMR LLC, including those attached to shares and financial instruments, now stand at 9.9108%, representing 28,236,653 voting rights. This is an increase from their previous notification where they held 8.6278%.

Ocado won’t rally just because it’s fallen 91%. It needs real catalysts — clearer profitability, stronger retail performance, and better visibility on international deals. In short: not ‘cheap’ on price alone, progress has to show up in the numbers.

From investegate ,,,a vote of confidence,,,

Ocado Group plc announced that several Persons Discharging Managerial Responsibilities (PDMRs), including Tim Steiner, Mark Richardson, Stephen Daintith, and James Matthews, have purchased ordinary shares through the company's Share Incentive Plan on 16 February 2026. Tim Steiner purchased 66 Partnership Shares at £2.277 each and 9 Matching Shares for £0.00, with an aggregated volume of 75 shares for a total of £150.28. Mark Richardson, Stephen Daintith, and James Matthews each purchased 66 Partnership Shares at £2.277 and 10 Matching Shares for £0.00, resulting in an aggregated volume of 76 shares at an average price of £1.977 for a total of £150.28. These transactions occurred on the London Stock Exchange.

Thumper1127 — useful on both counts.

On the buyback question: the company needs shareholder authority to repurchase, but it doesn’t legally have to pre‑announce an intention to start buying in every case. In practice, UK‑listed issuers normally announce a programme via RNS and then publish purchase notices while it runs because of Listing Rules, MAR and market transparency — so an RNS is the clearest signal you’ll see. Watch for an RNS and subsequent daily/periodic purchase notices; otherwise a buyback authority can sit unused until cash, covenant headroom and price line up.

On the customer feedback point: that anecdote is exactly the kind of operational colour the company should hear. Airlines often trigger post‑flight surveys only for the flight that actually completed on schedule (or the one in the booking record), so a delayed outbound that was recovered with a replacement aircraft can fall through the survey logic. That’s an oversight if true — selective surveying loses valuable feedback. If your friend wants to help, a short email to easyJet customer relations describing both legs (delay handling + smooth return) will get logged and is more useful than hoping an automated survey catches it.

They don’t have to pre‑announce an intention in every case, but for a listed company the combination of shareholder approval, Companies Act compliance, Listing Rules and MAR makes public announcement and ongoing disclosure the standard and expected route

Fair scepticism — but a 10% buyback authority is real optionality, not just theatre. Boards only execute buybacks when cash, covenant headroom and price make sense; issuing shares or doing a rights issue is dilutive and typically a last resort. Aircraft capex is usually financed via leases, sale‑leasebacks or debt, so capex plans don’t automatically cancel the option to return cash. Watch cash flow, net debt, covenant headroom and the board’s capital‑allocation wording — those are the real signals on whether buybacks will ever be used.

AGM results summary

All AGM resolutions passed by poll; board reappointments and shareholder measures approved. Voting showed strong majorities across ordinary and special resolutions, including approval of the Annual Report and Accounts and the final dividend.

Where’s the chat on this ?!

Real talk not otherwise speculation and dream of high life

There’s been a lot of opinion on this board — interesting hypotheses but not enough evidence.

Post the RNS/EIB/broker link and Level 2 evidence if you have it; otherwise too much speculation and opinion occurs, not confirmation.

Everyone’s entitled to a view — but calling a +17% jump ‘based on data’ is a stretch unless you’re referring to something specific in Ocado’s revenue trends, CFC performance, or guidance history. Right now the share price is hard to place because the fundamentals are mixed, and results can swing either way depending on what the RNS actually says. Small investors don’t move the price on their own — the institutions do. Happy to wait for the numbers rather than pre‑assign a percentage.

Always good to stay optimistic, but predicting a +17% jump on results day without seeing the numbers is just guesswork. Ocado’s updates can swing either way depending on revenue mix, CFC performance, and guidance. The only thing that moves the share price reliably is the actual RNS, not pre‑set percentages. Let’s see the results first — the proof really is in the eating, but it has to be based on data, not hope.

The Kroger CEO story is interesting, but it’s worth keeping perspective. This board has been jumping from one headline to the next since the workforce‑cut report yesterday, and most of it isn’t directly tied to Ocado’s fundamentals or today’s price action. Solid, verified news barely gets traction, while quick links or one‑liners get all the recommendations. Nothing wrong with sharing headlines, but it helps to separate what actually affects Ocado from what just adds to the noise.

?

Interesting to see how things play out here. A verified workforce‑cut story breaks yesterday and barely gets noticed, yet a quick one‑liner from another poster racks up half a dozen recommendations. Pretty much sums up how these boards behave after a drop — solid info gets drowned out by noise, and the simplest comments get the most traction. Worth keeping perspective and sticking to facts rather than the popularity contest.

Sunday Times report on Ocado job cuts — context neededToday 17:44

The Sunday Times is reporting that Ocado may cut up to 1,000 jobs as part of a renewed cost‑cutting drive after a difficult year for the automated warehouse side of the business. Reuters has picked it up but notes it hasn’t been independently verified. Worth keeping in mind that this is a media report, not an RNS, so it shouldn’t be treated as confirmed company guidance. If true, it would fit the wider trend of tech‑driven retailers tightening costs after a tough period, but until Ocado issues an official statement it remains press speculation. As always, best to separate verified news from weekend headlines.

The Sunday Times is reporting that Ocado may cut up to 1,000 jobs as part of a renewed cost‑cutting drive after a difficult year for the automated warehouse side of the business. Reuters has picked it up but notes it hasn’t been independently verified. Worth keeping in mind that this is a media report, not an RNS, so it shouldn’t be treated as confirmed company guidance. If true, it would fit the wider trend of tech‑driven retailers tightening costs after a tough period, but until Ocado issues an official statement it remains press speculation. As always, best to separate verified news from weekend headlines.