Member Info for RMR1969

PATT - I think you must be using the broadest definition of the word ‘analysis’

Personally I don’t see much of that from yourself, if you did provide it then perhaps people would be more interested in what you had to say.

Crabby - it wasn’t particularly a reference to yourself, apologies if it seemed that way, just catching up on the BB messages and see it mentioned a lot as though shorters have more info than other investors. It was posted quite a bit following the closed short yesterday afternoon on both here and ADVFN.

It certainly appears to help sentiment though I must admit that and that is a major positive factor here.

Hope we can all have a great day here.

Cheers Crabby.

I am just unclear why anybody thinks that investors who short have some sort of inside knowledge!

They take a gamble based on the same information we have, there are guarantees for them as there isn’t for us.

The fact that any have closed is just an indication that the person doing it either a) believes the share will start to rise in the near future or b) they need the money for some reason.........

Hoping for blue day!

Rayofhope

Good to have you here, I wouldn't worry too much about the RNS, it is only happening because whoever was dealing was using UBS and therefore they had to RNS it as they are working on our behalf for the potential sale. If they were not then we wouldn't have known about it.

It would appear that it was someone who had a short open and they decided that the share had dropped as far as they believed it would so they closed it, they had a punt, probably earned a few quid and have likely moved on or even gone long now, who knows?

Personally whilst this shows us shorts are closing I don';t think it was the reason for the rise in itself, maybe gave a few people a little courage that this could be a signal but the person would probably have no more information than us, he thought the share price would drop when he took it out, many on here think in the medium term it will rise. Each to their own.

That leaves open the question about the late and quite dramatic rise - I have no explanation and anyone who does will be guessing I would suggest, the share moves fast now when it does go up however and the shares are in stickier and stickier hands.

Best of luck.

Great close to the day, well done all.

Good to see it has also seen off a couple of the troublesome posters who appear to delight in write posts lacking any form of detail.

The RNS appeared to have an effect when we hit the high 30s, shook the tree and a few who were only just hanging on fell off, many others strengthened their grip however and a few new people joined, it now rather feels like sentiment is changing to a more positive direction, and no news will potentially lead to small gains in the days ahead as more and more people look to get aboard, I am fascinated to see if anything is released the next time we reach the late 30s should we get there before an RNS lands.......!

JulioK365

Hi Julio, whilst I am sure people appreciate your concern I have a few genuine questions re ARS, did they ever enter a formal FSP process, I cannot see that in the RNS available on this site. Had they appointed deal makers like UBS or M&A lawyers like DLA Piper, or was it rather just talk on the BB in the hope that a sale process may or could be announced?

Also when were they ever 36p, in the last 5 years they only ever reached 14p I believe, I imagine you therefore must be talking of a situation more than 5 years ago, can you confirm.

Thanks in advance.

you really would think with such important documents that people would get it right, bugs the **** out of me..........

looks like an error in the RNS, I think they have the numbers wrong.........expect another one correcting it IMO.

Ian

Have never entered your competition to date but here we go, better put my 'money where my mouth is'.........

Next major RNS - Friday 30th October

As previously mentioned this ties in to approx 4 weeks after DLA Piper 'appointed' and 12 weeks prior to that for FSP to run following the FSP RNS, no more than a guess but with some timelines to back it up. Companies tend to do things in round numbers or obvious dates for deadlines - ie 12 weeks, 4 weeks, end of month dates (30th or 31st), Fridays......you get my drift.

So what about the price, well I have previously suggested in the range of 60p-£1 and I am usually cautious so I am going for 65p.

This would value the assets at circa $3.285b (using 1.29 $ exchange rate and fully diluted shares at 3,032m (includes deferred shares and options) and also accounts for the ownership % for WK and MT). I have also validated this price by basing it on a circa 60% premium to the current high, this is a slightly above average premium for the sector based on takeovers across 2017/8 which was around 50-55%).

So not plucked out the air, a reasonable and sensible view I think based on the 'knowns.'

All that said, this share has surprised me at every turn, so, and I appreciate I am covering all bases here..., if the deal went through at a much higher price I would not be surprised, this is a unique situation I believe, resources are rare and in demand, prices are high and increasing, there will be political pressures, it is an aggressive sector.....etc etc. So up to a £1 is absolutely possible.

The one thing I do feel sure about is that an offer will be made. I have been in for well over a year, went into suspension with a good amount, never thought I would be able to add but have done so on numerous occasions since we re listed, more than doubling my holding, I have not once sold a single share.

GLA

ftsedow - I imagine you are being a little sarcastic re your rhodium point......

I mentioned on here a few days ago that I had watched the DS interview on Proactive again, one of the 'new' things which I picked up this time was the 3 mentions of rhodium he made, in fact he appears to try and shoe horn the mentions each time to make a point, I hadn't really picked up on it before, anyway he actually states at one point "significant grade rhodium" and he also reiterates the great price (at the time) $5000 per oz, it is nearly triple that now as we know!

You are right to highlight it, I don't think it should be under estimated.

Filtered him now, I see he failed to respond anyhow, hard to justify the significant change in view unless of course he is deliberately here to cause trouble.

I suspect this is what happened - he was invested in the 2-3p days, pumping it all the way (just look at his history), likely fancied himself as a bit of a clever trader so he sold up thinking he would buy back later when the share dropped back, it got suspended, he got locked out and he is now hacked off that he missed out on the rise to 30p and beyond.

Shame he couldn't just come on here and wish people well.

you appear to had a change of heart since your previous posts were quite bullish on EUA, interested to know what caused that change.........

previously you posted this:

"Looking very promising IMO. Shaking out short term holders without a huge drop. Any big increase needs this. Holding for the deal. Easy money."

earache - except it does say that the date the deal was undertaken was 19th Oct.......so that would be yesterday as opposed to today, why it was only just shared is unclear, but I guess they are not obliged to do it first thing.

Jester16 - I do not believe there is anything you suggest here, it was just 1.5% of a 31m holding at the end of the day............

nixan - I always feel compelled to correct inaccuracies as I see them, please don't be offended. The ACF report did not discount the flanks.

Please re read it, it applied a 30% discount to them based on the fact that the licence had not been issued at the time the report was published. It now has, so it would be fair to assume that if ACF did a report today then their price may increase from the range they suggested, how much is anyone's guess.

You may remember the rather poor article by SWS a few weeks ago suggesting 'insider selling' when we had the RNS from Phil Taylor. Well, like I said at the time, I wrote to them to complain as I felt the article was woefully misleading, to be honest I did not expect a response, but this morning I did indeed get a response.

I won't bore you with all the email but the key bit is this:

"With that in mind and upon further investigation of the issue, it became apparent that Mr Taylor was misclassified by us as an insider due to his large holding size. As mentioned above, in light of this information we have subsequently removed the article."

It was a nicely written email, very honest and explaining how their rather limited system works and how they are trying improve things going forward so they make no further errors.

Fair play to them.

raharh - you could well be right, I am just not sure that any legal firm, particularly of DLA Piper's standing would carry out significant work without regular payment along the way, are they likely to do loads of work but wait months for any money...someone else with more experience in this world may be able to tell us. However it is not normally how lawyers operate, also there are no guarantees from their perspective (or ours) that a deal will be agreed, or ratified by shareholders, however sure we are (and I am), they have no guarantee so in their mind that would be a risk that they do not need to take.

So I believe we must be making payments to them, and of course AP, assuming they are working for us, which we don't know for sure, but if they are, then they are not going to undertake months and months of costs before getting paid.

So pretty big monthly bills racking up and IMV a need to make payments along the way, if cash raised from WK is enough to pay for all this and the normal company costs then fine, just not sure it presently would be.

I repeat though, it would be a huge positive for me if it were the case, it would mean the BOD are as certain as they can be that a deal will be brokered.

very possibly Monkey70, AP, DLA Piper - these guys are not going to work for nothing for long, they will invoice periodically I would imagine, they ain't going to wait for a deal to be done and concluded before seeing a penny, so I think the money was raised quickly to support this, I could be very wrong, as with most suggestions here we are guessing, but it makes sense to me, it felt like an odd time to do a raise for the reasons we were given, and would be very positive if true for the reasons in my initial post.

Interested in others thoughts of course.

Do we believe that the $10m raise was actually to support operations in WK or was it more likely to be used for other purposes ie fees and costs related to a sale....?

It seemed an odd time to raise the money out of the blue like that and I have thought since the announcement that it was more to do with the sale process than we were being told.......

Now if you take a similar view to me on this then the BOD must be pretty sure of a sale completing because if it didn't then investors would be keen to see how the $10m was being spent, if a sale proceeds, no one will care........

Just a thought to put out there.

ethioethio - did the ACF report only account for 30% of MT (due to non issuance of flanks at that point) or did they reduce the value of MT BY 30%, makes a difference - genuine question, but I had understood it differently to you I think. I may be wrong.

Whichever, I agree with your point in that the ACF note valued us at a number we should most certainly be north of should a sale be announced. You also correctly point out that metal prices have increased since then and look to go further north in time.

Somewhere between 60-£1 is possible, more if any resource upgrades are announced as expected. AP must have been doing something for their money, nearly 6 months on the job now as far as we are aware.............