Member Info for specinvestor99

To me there is a difference between words and actions. In this case AB bought RRR shares in his pension account both the buying and the buying in his pension account are very strong actions.

AB purchase of RRR shares is consistent with the last RRR RNS and upcoming arbitral award .
An award at least equal to current market cap should double the current share price with more awards/litigation to come of 10x? (or is that my wishful thinking?)

Yes the Congolgese court judgment would be enforceable but the real question: "Is it collectible" IMO those funds are long gone. Hence AB/RRR have been focused on going after where the $15 million cash is held by the purchaser who has the funds and is ready to pay BUT they dont want to be dragged into this mess so they want binding instructions on how to pay (which would the goal of the arbitral award)

Arbitraton issue- AB said Presidency. I am not sure of the reasoning behind the process Perhaps its because it is a governmental quasi controlled company

I found it interesting that AB stated that the arbitration hearings were conducted by the Presidency. I have no experience in the Congo but I would think that would be unusual.

I am as impatient as every RRR shareholder but imminent does not mean SOON. It means "likely to occur at any moment"

The hearings have been held and RRR awaits the arbitrator decision. It could be today or months from now. The exact timing is unknown. Of course AB is positive and believes/hopes it will be soon. IMO AB is his own worst enemy in setting expectations.

These are high stakes negotiations with the other side clearly pushing for their own interest. A discount was proposed, presumably accepted, but the other party decided to go for a bigger discount. Perhaps not handled in best manner but such tactics (although frowned upon) are unfortunately not uncommon.

How wonderful You always make money and are generous to others

The obvious reason is that the major shareholders believe that AB is doing a good job and that any replacement is not warranted. It is simply false or potentially misleading to suggest anything else.

I certainly have complained about the lack of transparency and/or creating unrealistic expectations

AB certainly has sufficient world experience not mention a news conference simply because a low level person made a comment/suggestion. Given the apparent level of corruption involved and the Congo's historical corruption why would they (Congolese officials) want a news conference called on this topic?

Helpful quote “Steelmin is going to a great little asset” on 18 Jan 2018

100% accurate IF the focus is on the word LITTLE

Personally I need a little less HELP and more facts.

Still waiting on news conference and NOMAD to translate documents

The public has no details about the arbitration. Arbtitration can either be binding or non-binding

For RRR however it appears (with emphasis on appears) to be binding because RRR is expecting an Award.

Even if it is binding collection is another matter. RRR already has two court judgements. The more that time passes the more the questions are concerning/disturbing

I agree- I am still waiting for the NOMAD to finish translating the documents.

RRR/AB are really hurt by people like "helpful' who post such false information, perhaps knowlingly. since there is claim of 'inside information'

Where is the disclosed press conference?????

again false- you said NOMAD was translating an explanation provided to explain a delay on announcing Congo results. NOT as you now state documents will need to be translated. (future tense as opposed to past tense) and NOMAD needed 'chapter & verse' again posting that something had in fact happened and that NOMAD was now gathering, reviewing and translating documents

In event the lack of RNS is hardly evidence that you are posting while in possession of inside information. You have posted numerous times that you know what is going on

I agree- I am still waiting for the NOMAD to finish translating the documents.

RRR/AB are really hurt by people like "helpful' who post such false information, perhaps knowlingly. since there is claim of 'inside information'

re comment-'final dollar' really?
this is vaguely optimistic with no details. it implies that something is close to happening on the Elephant IPO which was filed months ago and clearly out of date and in need of an update if in fact an IPO would be happening.

I agree, although it could be renewed but the the reality is with $100 oil, Elephant Oil is still not funded. Makes you wonder who was managing the ship,

Helpful - sorry to side with KimiR but you post that the NOMAD wanted chapter & verse implying that something had in fact been accomplished in Congo.

You constantly imply that you inside information and imply that things will be positive

LOL rather than address my point which was % success rate You resort to a personal attack without any idea of my personal or professional background. FYI I have a long and sucessfull background in the mineral exploration business and understand very well the various business models used by the smaller exploration companies. I have no desire to conduct an in-depth discussion with anyone on this board about the relative merits/flaws in RRR/AB business dealings over the past 15 years. Nor discuss how the chances others on AIM regarding exploration sucess. Personally I fail to see why anyone who invest for exploration sucesss from someone with a law background. IMO Legal sucess-yes exploration-no However that is only my personal viewpoint to each their own

I can certainly sympathize for those who have lost money in the past and hope I will not be joining those ranks.

I repeat I am here because I like the risk/reward relationship for future prospects on RRR current projects (Congo-legal focus; Australia IPO legal focus; Elephant IPO legal focus; etc you get my point on what AB is doing NOW which IMO is clearly different from the past

Please google the % of exploration projects which becomes a mine

Answer less than 1%

In any IMO the future is why I am here not the prior results.

Banbury- I am assuming we are all native english language speakers and as such Kimi did not make the points you are now making. and I agree
-AB says all projects are good (no surprise there as every company does not that. I would be shocked if you could find any CEO anywhere who has said we just got this project and its a piece of Shxx

more to the point AB/RRR like every other public company do have the capacity nor the regulatory authority to state what 'value' to place on a project. More importantly even if they did would any one have believed AB if he had said 2 years the VUP properties were worth $200m +

-AB/RRR has a history of acquiring multiple projects far beyond the capability of a mid size company to handle much less a a very small one

'Even a blink squirrel finds an acorn every once in a while'

However despite those valid points RRR/AB is at this point in history with a pending very potentially arbitration award pending.

Kimi LOL I covered all your points and then some. You just dont want to engage on actual facts.

The reality is RRR was doing work in the Congo IMO not much but some. RRR was in fact focused on activities such as Elephant or Australia or even Kenya but is that really surprising given the amount of funding RRR had to work?

Each project has its own set of unique obligations which have to be balanced at the RRR corporate level to keep them all going. It could be justifiable to say RRR had too many projects given its funding capabilities but outsiders dont have the same level of information that management does.

The reality is now facing RRR shareholders. The Congo award (no matter RRR got it here) is potentially very significant