Member Info for Scampthedog

City link, Angard, RMG, Amazon, RMG. Worked for RMG now for over the last four years.

Gets rather confusing for me at times in all fairness. I also worked for another company (sorting mail) whilst working for Angard...and worked for two more couriers before working for the now defunct City Link. I think I am right in saying that I also worked for RMG with Manpower before working for Angard...like I stated -- confusing!

I also recall working one year as a Christmas casual for RMG...but cannot recall exactly when. In fact, regarding Royal Mail, I may well have done the first term of employment with RMG before Angard...unsure now of that one come to think of it...and also unsure about where Manpower fits in...not that it makes any difference.

And all of the above spanning over ten years employment. Well over ten years that is...more likely best part of 12.

Good luck with sorting it all out!

I will reply to you firstly, spudy.

Your quote regarding my good self: "The day you say anything positive about RMG ,i will sell all my shares."

Really? Best start selling them then. This RMG thread is littered with positive comments, from me that is, going all the way back over the last couple of years.

Either you are some kind of moron or ******ed in some sad sort of way...or perhaps you just struggle with your reading...is that it?

Or maybe you just cannot be bothered going back through my many comments before making such foolish and uninformed remarks as you just did?

JBTHISTLE. Whether you believe that I work for RMG or not is not of the slightest importance to me...I could not care less.

And regarding my share price predictions? It does not need a financial genius to see that in three years time (maybe even less?) the share price could be over £6.00 a share.

Why this continual reference to "hedging" my predictions?

Every single day on this board, and thousands of others, people give their views on where current share prices may be heading...upwards or downwards.

Your comments are completely ridiculous.

Oh and if it has escaped your attention: not only do thousands of armchair investors (thats people like yourself also) make millions of comments every day regarding stock price predictions...but so do thousands of banks, stock brokers, analysts and other various forms of the media...like newspapers for one.

What are we all registered here for if it is not to discuss where the company's future prospects may well lie? Are we here just to talk about the weather?

Unless you regard yourself as being some sort of self-appointed regulator who decides what we can or cannot comment on I would suggest you might well refrain from continually making the crass remarks that you do.

And the same goes for several other idiots who frequent these pages I have to say.

what won't follow though is your former much repeated boast of £5.50 in 2020.
Errr...2 days and counting.

Better luck in 2021 perhaps? But I very much doubt it.

From your posting. My words....
"Scampthedog - Don't be too proud. I can see how you rub a lot of people up the wrong way with some of the attitude in your posts."

And you continue to quote me with...
"Your use of the word "IF" so much simply means your hedging your bets, so you would have been right if it found support at any of those levels but you would also have been correct if it did not. Not difficult being right when you've covered every possibility. I mean, tonight IF Arsenal score more goals than City then they could win, otherwise they might get a draw or they could lose."

Obviously, Talk2Much, you also do not understand what the word "IF" means.

"IF": used to say that a particular thing can or will happen only after something else happens or becomes true.

What is even more obvious is that you are an individual who deals in...ABSOLUTES.

A bit like some all-seeing omnipotent god.

Well, given that, could you kindly give your predictions for the share price in 2021? Where it may be come Christmas next year? Or even at the end of this coming January would do.

Oh...and in your summing up...try not to include the word "IF."

For instance: "IF" there is no threat of another dispute. Or, "IF" the pound crashes. Or, "IF" RMG fail on their promise to deliver the three new Hubs on time. Or, "IF" the new Network proves be inadequate. Or, "IF" our competitors should come up with fantastic new ideas. Or, "IF" Brexit proves to be too great an economic burden involving multiple extra costs......and so on and so forth.

You could of course substitute phrases like, "should not" or "upon failing to do so" or "in the absence of"...but, still, it all adds up to the same thing -- "IF" or "IF NOT!"

In fact there are a "IF" or "IF NOT" million and one possibilities really. Are there not? Or to be more precise -- I would say -- an infinite amount of possibilities would be the proper way of stating it. You would agree of course?

But perhaps not. For after all...you deal in ABSOLUTES. So go ahead. Give us all the full benefit of your great in-depth knowledge why don't you.

Your comments are without a doubt the most priggish and crass of 2020. Congratulations...you win a cookie.

P.s Try going just one "normal day" whilst conversing with friends, colleagues and family without using the word "IF" at least a dozen times. A dozen? You would do well! Lol.

Beyond belief -- really quite staggering in your pomposity!

I have exactly 50,000 shares left invested in this company at an average price of 3.3 pence...and would only buy more if the price fell well below 2.5 pence.

That is all it is worth now to me. A once former investment (sold off in the main) reduced to a mere punt...as repeatedly stated on many occasions.

I hope it comes off for all of us...why would I not want this company to become profitable?

Difference between most on here and me is this: whilst the great majority of you have hundreds of thousands of shares (perhaps more than this some of you) and are invested quite heavily...I am quite the opposite.

I hope you all have the opportunity of top-slicing whilst making money all the way up. And therein lies another difference: because I am invested in such a small way...I will just sit on my hands and wait. If it crashes to zero, so what? I lose £1700.00. No big deal. But a big deal (to me at any rate) if they ever hit 25 pence a share.

A mere punt, NICO...a mere punt, my old shoe.

A merry Christmas to all of you...and all the very best for the New Year. Cheers!

...and this occasion will be particularly gratifying I have to say.

Regarding my s.p predictions and comments on any negotiated settlement. Unless anyone on here suffers from dyslexia or is/was, at the moment of reading my former comments, intoxicated or under the influence of certain mind-bending drugs, I fail to see where I have been wrong regarding my share price predictions...and the "Shorter Working Week" in connection to any proposed deal with the CWU membership.

1. I postulated, whilst the share price was rising, in response to a poster's open request a couple of weeks ago, that the s.p would fall quite markedly in the very near future.....and so it did...from 354 down to 310. That a retrace of 12.5%...or there about. What was wrong about that?

I also stated at least twice over the last week or two that support was at 315 followed by 310. Yesterday it bounced off 310. What was wrong about that? I further stated "IF" it did not hold at 310 then 295 would be next support. "IF!" What do you not understand about the word "IF"?

2. Conditions concerning the proposed agreement between RMG and the CWU. I have repeatedly stated that any deal put to the membership of the CWU "WILL" have to include, in direct contradiction to what certain posters on here have claimed is not of any great importance, an agreement between both parties in reference to a reduction in working hours: the "Shorter Working Week". Again, I have been proven to be -- CORRECT!

It would seem that some people on here just cannot understand plain simple English; and many of you, including some posties I have to add, just do not appear to understand just how important that reduction in working hours is to tens of thousands of your working colleagues...and hence the union.

Stupid people: you now stand corrected!!

"Because banks want 100% collateral coverage. The security the bank would demand would be unpalatable to shareholders. Most likely in the form of the rights and all equipment, which if seized would make the entire operation unviable.

Banks do not take cpr or predicted oil in ground as guarantees. They would use existing producing assets but as we all know BlOcks at the moment would not secure a multi million dollar loan.

A compelling read your reply, scoobyrex...and for contradictory reasons.

1. Your first paragraph talks of collateral...or rather what Block COULD not offer, and by that you mean: the whole of the actual "moving parts" of the business. What of it? If you have a viable business why is it you cannot put up, for collateral, everything that makes that business an actual working project? If you are so convinced it will be a success why the reluctance to take on a loan?

2. Who said anything about using "predicted oil in the ground" as some form of collateral? Certainly not I.

I am under the impression Block already have stored assets of oil and gas. Or am I wrong?

If I am not wrong, why is it then that the board did not prefer to use all these hard assets for possible collateral? Stored oil and gas, plus the rig and everything else connected to the actual drilling operations.

Perhaps I am just being a bit overly simplistic? Or naive even?

I don't have to defend my predictions...regarding where the s.p might go over the last couple of weeks they have been spot on.

Indeed, I mentioned 310 as support earlier today; I note, with some interest, this is where the s.p actually bounced off a little time back in today's trading session.

If it does not hold at 310...then without a doubt 295 will follow.

Personally, I could not care less about the drop in the price: In my opinion the s.p got far too in front of itself due to all the hype concerning a Christmas lockdown and the mountains of mail piling up. I just see it as another possible buying in opportunity...depending where the s.p finally settles of course.

And further to that: has it found bottom yet? No idea. But will buy more shares when it starts to slowly increase in value...and more importantly: starts to increase because of solid fundamentals...not made up pie-in-the-sky.

I will wait till the outstanding business with the CWU is concluded before I make a decision on whether the s.p has found proper support or not.

"£5.50 in 2020".

Only 10 days left. Good luck!

Everyone registered can see the comments I have made here repeatedly over the last weeks regarding the s.p, and where it might go...indeed it turns out now that is exactly where it has gone. Much to my chagrin of course...but it had to undergo a pullback at sometime...it was inevitable. I would have been more than happy to have been wrong about this fall in the s.p...but it was not to be.

I concede that there are probably several reasons for the fall; profit taking (as I have mentioned previously) Brexit, problems which RMG's present logistics (back-log) cost of hiring over 30,000 extra short-term workers...and, of course, settlement (if voted yes for) with the CWU.

If you would like to put forward any other suggestion for the sudden drop please feel free to explain. I am all ears...or in this case eyes.

I stand by what I have already stated...in so many words: the cost of any settlement with the CWU is not going to be inconsiderate -- far from it!!

He does not have till the end of the week...in fact he has less than 72 hours. Cheers!

Many thanks for the various answers...albeit some rather childish ones. But there again...I suspect I am considerably older than a good few of you.

Two points in regard to my former queries regarding Block's fund raise.

1. scoobyrex: "That is fundamentally not how the relationship between banks and mining outfits and in particular oilers work."

Why not? If you are a business, of any sort that is, and you have a "quantifiable asset" that (although, in this particular case, admittedly, is subject to market demand) can be easily calculated in value...why cannot you raise a loan against it? The loan could take into account any sudden crash in that assets intrinsic value (as oil is most obviously subject to) and the risks, for the lender, adjusted accordingly.

2. NICODEMUS63: "according to Malcy, I posted the link sometime back, the big investors didn't need any encouragement, they were 'instrumental' in the placing being agreed. Presumably to buy in more shares at a low price knowing there are big dollars to.be made, buying in more influence, both or just thought it sensible"...

By this, NICODEMUS63, I take it you mean that the "big investors" were not concerned in what might have been most financially prudent regarding the most cost-effective way of raising the money (a bank loan) but aided by the board were able to both average down greatly and at the same time ensure that if we do hit it big then they take the lion's share of the profits...whilst the smaller, insignificant and mere nuisance minnows known as private investors (like everyone here on this board) get screwed-over?

Or have I got it all wrong again. I am, after all, just an amateur in this investing game. Learning though.

...it did drop...and all the way down to 315...just like I said it could.

If it does not hold above 310...then first support after failing to find support there will be 295.

And as for the sudden reversal in the s.p?

Quite simple: the calculated cost of the proposed deal (which quite obviously it would appear had been leaked beforehand) has now been added to the equation.

As always, we, as the private investors, are the last to find out concerning any highly pertinent information.

"The brutal truth is that if BLOE had a viable cash generative business they wouldn’t have just taken more equity investment at 3p a share. If the gas or oil were seen as true reserves they could have got debt via an RBL from a bank. The banks clearly don’t think it’s real hence the shareholder dilution. It’s a shame but what else can one think?"

What is so flawed or incorrect about these comments regarding raising funds?

Anyone care to answer? Throw a little light perhaps on the necessity (expediency?) for the manner in which the recently completed fund raise was undertaken.

Just curious. And also very curious as to know just what was so convincing regarding the board's convictions when encouraging these big shareholders to invest (reinvest?) so heavily over the last couple of weeks or so.

Any "pay deal" will have to include reference (solid detailed-provisions leading to a very near future reduction in working hours) to the "shorter-working week" ...or it will be a non-starter as far as a very large proportion of the CWU membership will be concerned.

A lot of posties are not overly bothered about a pay increase of a couple of percent; they were promised a 35 hour working week (due less than 12 months from now as dictated by the "Four Pillars Agreement") ...and they are adamant they are going to have it.

If this latest proposal does not include a very near-future reduction in those hours...then...well...it won't find much support with a big part of the union membership that is for certain.

I am not suggesting the union could not persuade a majority to accept a deal without reference to a definite reduction in working hours at this moment in time, I am just making the point that: if the membership voted by a majority to accept this latest offer, it would have to be a "working majority"...not a slim or significantly small majority -- but a big majority!

Just like any political party who wins by a majority to then form a government...if the majority is not big enough...it is unable to carry that stamp of genuine authenticity that it makes decisions underpinned upon a mandate from the electorate. Simple as that really.

I don't work at the YDC. My place of work is much further south; and the vehicle involved was a box-trailer (single deck). The contractor drove nearly 200 miles southwards (empty)...and then returned.

This is not an uncommon occurrence for flustered managers to send out empty trailers when that duty is commencing outward on what will be a return trip...especially if there is a queue of impatient and highly frustrated other drivers fast lining up outside the gates.

It is, in a lot of cases, an inherent problem (most obviously) with allowed driver hours...and also compounded by bombastic and belligerent drivers who bully (attempt to bully in my case -- they get f--k-d off!) the pre-advice staff into leaving well before their departure times...at the cost of some late arriving mail failing in many circumstances it has to be said.

Not only is the "Network" long overdue an overhaul...but drivers working terms and conditions need one also. Subject to the laws defining drivers hours of course.

The share price was inevitably going to retreat quite a bit...and I stated as much sometime back; In fact I have reiterated it several times over the last few weeks.

Just a simple glance at the Google chart will tell you where support and resistance resides.

We are now sitting smack-dap on support. If it cannot hold here on Monday, next support at 315; followed by 310. If it falls below 310 then next support resides at 295.

And if it does not hold there...then I have no idea where it may collapses back down to.

absolutely bang on!!

Impressed! Sums up the situation with Royal Mail's present good fortunes perfectly.

"It will continue to outperform the market until normality resumes and / or reality sets in, much like it did on October 1 2018, especially If UKPIL cannot book a profit in the next RNS."

"At the current price this is a trading and speculative stock, as opposed to an investment proposition and opportunity, at least until UKPIL can show it can be profitable and that is the "gamble" new investors are currently taking."

Nicely encapsulated.

As one looking out from the inside, I can state, quite categorically, as every other postie here also can, that volumes, at this moment in time, are still at ridiculous levels. Where I work we are are a little luckier than most...the Out-Houses are taking the greater part of the heat; I am hearing stories every single night, from drivers mostly, of the complete mayhem being played out continually within those crammed and heaving walls.

But how much of this great turnover provided by this unprecedented deluge of traffic will translate into profit?

Just to give an example of where a lot of money will be wasted inefficiently I provide this little incident.

A contractor driver, working for a big transport company, came into my place of work last night; apparently, he makes one run a night from a depot in my town...and then returns, via the same route, and drops off at our depot. On arriving at his pickup point and asking if there was any mail going outward, the manager responded by affirming, that, indeed, there was. The manager then spoke twice, at separate intervals, into his radio asking for the mail to be brought up to that particular bay for the driver...no response. Frustrated, the manager told him (the driver) he might as well get on his way...he proceeded to do so. He then drove nearly two hundred miles with an empty trailer -- an empty trailer!! Granted, it was only a box...but empty? Absolute madness! Incidentally, the driver casually inquired of me: did I know the cost of that single return trip he made that would be incurred by Royal Mail. I replied: no, I did not. £1000.00 he said. Staggering! No wonder Royal Mail are renowned for burning money. And this goes on night after night in Royal Mail depots...well, certainly at Christmas it does. Truly shocking.

I have a very small holding in Block...just see it as nothing more than a day at the races myself. A simple bet on some old nag. If it comes in -- great! If not...ah well...whatever.

But to keep on buying this stock, even at these prices, is just not wise in my opinion.

For all of you who have invested heavily here I truly hope it comes off...no one can knock you for being brave and resolute that is for sure.

Simply put, I am just not prepared to risk anymore myself; although in all fairness I do also have to add I don't think the odds of them making good are particularly low...I would say it is about even myself. Like I have always stated --just a punt! A two horse race.

Its not the necessity for the inevitable fund raise, and being faced with no other option but to dilute the shares even further due to this and various other unavoidable reasons (plus some avoidable mishaps also perhaps?) that frustrates most here (investing in any "new" mining operation is an absolute punt!) ...but rather their modus operandi employed whilst going about it all...the aforementioned fund raise that is.

Absolutely lamentable!!