Member Info for Roadrunnr

Hi aandi you seem more relaxed than me which is fair enough. I dont have concerns over the values involved as it is a drop in the ocean but the principle irks me somewhat as I like to see monies targeted clearly with returns obvious. It just feels a bit to me like EQT helping MNRG out when they are in a sticky spot. However it wont affect my commitment to EQT so GLA and DYOR.

The stake we had in MNRG has halved in value since we exchanged before. The oil asset is under dispute with a former director, the Uranium is on hold and the gold is still in the exploration stage. MNRG is a tiny company with not a lot of money. I have a small holding of them but may now sell as my exposure thru EQT is enough for me. What do we want with 14 percent of an Investment co?

Exchange replaced by asterisks!

We have entered into a substantial ************** with MNRG. I fail to see what EQT are getting but am more concerned with the dilution for us. Opinions?

What are these worth? How is this value realised? Who Pays? However any additional income to a project is welcome.

If CF wants to grow the company then I suspect he would invest in more accommodation sites and expand the core rather than buying other companies. Otherwise it makes a nonsense of spinning off. I tend to favour a dividend but maybe small as a token.

There is an opportunity for a European country to become the region waste processor for a country with ambition and a clean process. The Victorians wouldn't have sat on their hands!

Why is it cheaper to buy than to sell? Because the MMs have lots to sell you and don't want to buy any more.

Ignoring SP movements (which are only relevant if you are buying or selling) and looking at EQT The Company then this has been an excellent year. From almost a standing start they have vanquished a challenge to the IP, have initiated and progressed many projects of varying sizes, have a clear stated strategy, have funds behind them and collaboration partners and have started to create demonstration sites. With projected deliveries in 2022, the next year should also be excellent. If you are interested in building a company rather than just trading shares then you should be very happy. The path is and will not be smooth but neither will it be as rocky as some on here would have you believe. GLA and a prosperous 2022.

The big problem is that it seems that the short term strategy has been shot down and 2 years could have been lost. If the legal claim is successful it seems that MNRGs outlay could be returned but the loss is much greater as the income from BritNRG was probably going to be the motor for investment in new projects which will now not be able to happen without going to market again. Although MNRG has a minority stake I cannot see BritNRG giving out any profits and suspect that profit will be 'spent' on services and salaries.

I suspect the questions are given to them but even so it means more info becomes available.

Surely if MNRG has a minority interest in BritNRG then how profits are released to the owners is at the control of the majority holders unless stated in the SPV formation contracts.

And give him some money for a small share so he can do it up!! Lol.

The completion of the purchase of BritNRG SHOULD be contractual and so compensatable. If not then failure by MNRG board and consequences should follow. I have great sympathy for those who have big holdings not involved in these actions. GLAH.

Sorry Reg but something doesnt stack up here. If MNRG own 50% of BritNRG (plus casting vote) then PR at best can only own 50%. If BritNRG own the Sunswept Asset then why is the vendor making a claim? If this holds true then PR can have no control of BritNRG as MNRG has control. This is clearly not so so what is the true position? It may be that MNRG does not own 50% of BritNRG because payment was being made in tranches and a payment has been refused so that the ownership of BritNRG by MNRG is incomplete. Pure speculation on my part and could easily be wrong but curious to know!

It looks like major strategic blunder where MNRG has paid towards the asset but not secured ownership whilst incurring liability. Either nieve or trying to be 'too smart' maybe. These are supposed to be experienced businessmen but it looks amateurish.

I still do not understand how an agreement to pay a sum in exchange for a percentage of an asset can result in not completing that agreement. Anyone explain in simple terms?

MNRGs business model is to be an investor not an operator. I suspect they will sell on maybe with some small continuing interest.

Not just 'move on'! This episode has been incompetence somewhere in this SPV process which should not happen in a professional company. Maybe too much on trust - which may have cost MNRG significantly not just in money but more so in opportunity. I suspect MNRG may be coming back to the market now for funds which will dilute holders again. I am a bit miffed...

The only thing this share needs is some operating plants - 2022 and patience.