Member Info for specinvestor99

Robins some comments

1) more gold is always better than less or no gold

2) more gold does not mean higher share price- there are other factors at play which can eliminate or reduce that positive

3) a higher price is always better than a lower or flat gold price.

4) a higher gold price does not mean a higher share price-- there are other factors at play which can eliminate or reduce that positive

Due to various risk factors a higher gold price will first be seen in producing companies (large to small) and then the financing activities will increase for exploration companies (ie money is available for exploration) So monitor financing made to junior companies for $ moving into that sector

The market conditions determine how fast everything moves and by how much. Higher and fast gold price increases will move this process faster.

This process historically has been measured in weeks/months---not hours or days

IMO the lithium news for RRR will be the shortest time to move RRR share price

If gold price continues to attract funds, then eventually it flows to the larger miners then the smaller miners and finally to exploration companies. This will (eventually) help with finding a partner on Migori as well as an IPO for the Australian assets

Current situation

DRC

RRR is waiting for something to happen with the arbitrator award. No RRR shareholder likes to wait and would prefer a decision. A positive decision for any amount $1+ million would have a positive impact but our desire for an outcome does not drive the arbitration decision.

Lithium

This looks exciting. We wait for tangible results

Banbury I am not sure why you post misinformation. RRR is only entitled to 50%. The only 'offers' were bogus and not from authorized people. AB went down that rabbit hole once already so a repeat of that approach is just a waste of time.

Since AB says he accomplished the purpose of his trip he should be in a position soon to make the following RNS

1) site planning done, mining contractor found

2) sales offtake agreement signed

3) export license applied- with est time frame to obtain

and finally

4) export license granted

each of those milestones is significant and by issuing mutliple RNS then RRR can tell their story

From Banbury

"Bottom line is if Bells son was not in the middle there would be nothing to question."

So the transaction is OK but it is a related party transaction and therefore questionable?

This is sad. IMO RRR volume continues and share price will continue to go up at least for the next week

Banbury-- LOL try FTX-there is actually an ongoing criminal trial. Enron is another good example

please stop confusing bad historical results with possible criminal activity

Lack of transparency-blame exchange rules. Disclosures made by public companies are reviewed by independent accounting firms, NOMADS, outside attorneys etc. This framework might not be what you want or need but public companies have to follow those rules, not yours

To all

It is likely that AB was sick and missed elementary school on multiple occasions.

absolutely shocking

Still checking to see if AB is current on his immunization shots.

Reality check- RRR share volume in the past week is incredible, RRR share price is UP!

bashers response? oh no AB has children

my response. -if thats what it takes to get RRR share and volume up then AB should have more children. Adoption would avoid the 9 month wait.

Banbury- an alternative explanation

By having a friendly party (son) hold first position AB/RRR has also taken away leverage from other RRR's creditors and thus has provided a level of protection for RRR from its creditors.

Current reality -this friendly party (son) has not taken any action contrary to the interest of RRR's shareholders (that we know of). Indeed this may have prevented other RRR's creditors from taking action against RRR thus harming RRR shareholders.

Because there are almost always at lease two viewpoints of RPT transaction is exactly why RPT transaction have issues.

Banbury thank you explanation. In Canada 'charge' typically refers to a criminal proceeding. However in the UK 'charge' relates to a loan and the holder filing a lien on corporate assets.

So to be clearer (to me) your complaint is Bell's son lent funds to RRR and as part of the loan filed a lien (charge) against RRR's assets and since it it is a related party transaction ('RPT") that it is wrong (potentially criminal) for that transaction to have happened.

Personally I dislike RPT however as you pointed out this information (about RRR) is clearly publicly available thus no intent to conceal or deceive. All the major stock exchange in North America (TSX, NYSE, NASDAQ, AMEX etc) all allow RPT

Banbury While it is fair to complain about share performance, Congo delay etc. IMO some of your comment border on slander/libel. RRR is in good standing with AIM and unless there is an investigation of some sort it is false to state "disregard for governance'. Similarly you comment about "charges from companies controlled by his son"

I doubt you have any evidence to support such statements and if you do then file a complaint with the proper authorities.

Posting such comments here is irresponsible and detracts from the message that you wish to convey. I do appreciate all comments including those who disagree with me.

Ajay -My reading is the note holder in lieu cash repayment can convert the debt into RRR shares at a 15% discount IF RRR has a placing of $200,000 or more in the next 6 months

Per RNS 1st tranche for $210,000 is closing so it is done. RNS states up to $500,000 so more can happen.

I would look for an RNS on Lithium planning and perhaps offtake. Even if Congo was a done deal on Friday (tomorrow) IMO it take at least 2 weeks for funds to show up in the UK Why? AB would have to travel to Congo, the Congo banking system is not as efficient as a 1st world country like UK, EU, Canada or the US and their are exchange restrictions. All of which are manageable but is not an immediate process. Large wire transfers are always looked at to ensure there is no money laundering, criminal intent, terrorist connections, tax fraud etc. I would think anything coming out of the Congo particular for a first time sender (like RRR) of funds would face such reviews

Banbury- re "offer of half" AB made comments during interviews which impacts this. The arbitral award will be published and will contain an explanation for the award. Someone wins and someone loses. If the offer was valid (bearing in mind RRR had offer last year which was not valid) and if a 3rd party gets $ then is that viewed as a 'bribe' AB commented that RRR could not make such a deal. In any event this is certainly not something that could be via telephone call. If a deal is to be done then it has to 'face to face' and money collected while AB is in the Congo.. Just my opinion.

$15 million is at stake via arbitration. RRR is owed $10 million (counting the $5 million already paid out. If RRR can get $7.5 now, knowing that the other $2.5 million will be paid to their 'partner' and that they will never collect of what is truly owed. Then so be it. RRR should take what they can get NOW and then worry about the balance later.

Banbury-the recent funding makes no pretense about its uses. As I stated this kicks the can down the road by just paying the bare minimum. RRR continues to need a major funding event.

verbal updates? When I read your phrase 'verbal updates' I think of telephone calls is this what you mean?

The written posts, written RNS or the podcasts are indisputable evidence of statements made by RRR/AB.

RRR's planning meeting in Zimbabwe, travel to site, hotels, meals in Zimbabwe, offtake meeting in Dubai and then trip to DRC is probably a $50,000 cost. It is not only AB's travel costs but everyone's else cost as well as their time to be at those meetings.

Comments about offtake agreements

--mineral production ALWAYS a requires an offtake agreement.

-Worldwide there are more than 4 possible purchasers of Lithium. While there may have been only 4 potential buyers within Zimbabwe but now since an export license is now required there is no reason why ALR (RRR) can not sell worldwide. Since the build of the market is in China this means China.

Sale of minority interest of ALR-no major mining company would want a 10% interest and IMO that is not the low hanging fruit which is exactly what they are pursing-a) find a mining contractor and concurrently b) find buyer for ore (offtake agreement).

When A & B are accomplished (meetings occuring now and probably lasting thru next week) then significant value would have been created/realized. If not then RRR/ALR gain valuable knowledge about what the project needs to achieve A and/or B

ex-mining contractors say I can deliver production of x per month. offtake agreement says I am willing to buy between 5 to 10. Does that fit with mining contractor? What adjustments can be made? This is what planning is for, it is not a static environment.

Capt_kurt-LOL how long have you been saying that? Its still not true. RRR has had a consistent course of action of raising a bit of money (kicking the can down the road)to keep RRR going until a significant cash event happens (Congo, ELEP IPO or Lithium sales). At the moment AB is focused on Lithium where, if successful, we could see a significant RNS maybe in 1-4 weeks, its hard to determine from the outside how close RRR might be. Are the current planned meetings the start of meaningful discussions or the conclusion?

To Helpful re Why spend money in Kenya?

Licenses have to be renewed. Also keep in mind that that are ongoing costs and obligations to keep a license, not only in Kenya but on every other license owned by RRR