Member Info for specinvestor99

Hear AB explain 'lengthy process in DRC' led them to get claims in IC and BF hear https://x.com/RRR_RedRock

It struck me as strange given how RRR has state that DRC is immenient

Banbury good to hear that you have backtracked/corrected your earlier statement

My point is that the bashing posts are over the top. RRR will survive, cash is coming from the royalty.

The IC sale is dependent on due diligence but it certainly it holds the promise of additional cash

RRR will continue to issue shares to survive

Both reports referenced by Helpful apply to "Gold MINERS" so they do not apply to RRR which does NOT mine any gold.

Helpful The key phrase in this report is "Gold miners" with particular emphasis on word miners.

This report does not apply to RRR

To all Is there any after market trading in RRR shares? With no SOMA 3% royalty reported by Banbury I am looking at selling all my shares. Maybe this news has not spread

I am not sure where Banbury got this information but this is really big news.

No doubt other RRR's shareholders, like me, were anticipating the cash flow from the 3% would significantly help RRR during its obvious cash crunch.

It now appears, thanks to Banbury's work, that the 3% does not exist. Some one in the UK needs to report this ASAP!!!!!!!!!!!!

Banbury re "Soma is someone else's asset]." Are you stating that RRR does not have a 3% royalty? If true this is very significant.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I had no idea that RRR was making such false claims. All RRR;s existing shareholders should note this very very false claims made by RRR and AB

The AIM regulatory bodies should be immediately notified,

Flightman your bashing is laughable. RRR has assets- IC is being sold probably 6+ figures, cash from Soma royalty is coming, work is happening on BF

IMO RRR was too aggressive in pushing for a RRAL deal and too optimistic about getting DRC cash. IMO DRC will happen but RRR simply can not count on the timing of the cash to plan for more property and/or work programs.

RRR will continue to survive but the question is how many more shares will have to be issued?

Branbury

Over the past month, Lithium's price has risen 15.73%, but it is still 10.25% lower than a year ago.

What value did the 200 tons have on June 30, 2024? June 30, 2025

What is the % lithium? What refinery will even take it? There is no shortage of lithium. Refineries have limited capacity so they want higher grade ore,

I believe this is lower grade material. Refineries dont want it right now, although that may change in the future. If the hold cost is low then RRR may want to keep it, spoilage is not a problem, theft is probably not a problem but insurance may be warranted.

If this material actually had value then RRR should kept buying ore and/or mining it.

Banbury since we know the lithium project failed if your allegation is true that RRR did not incur more costs by paying for 200 tons then purely from a financial standpoint that is a positive.

Yes the accuracy of information is an issue as well as the lack of information.

Basically your complaint is that RRR committed fraud by not actually buying the ore. I am not sure RRR ever made a declarative statement that ore was in fact purchased. I can only suggest that you obtain facts (if possible).

IMO the issue is not about buying any lithium ore but rather did the 200 tons actually exist? was it in fact exported by truck across the border?

The export document might be publicly available. Personally I think Lithium is a dead horse and I see no point in beating a dead horse. Same feelings about Greenland, Cyprus banking, steelmin and all the other failed projects. RRR confirms those are failures so fundamentally there is no disagreement.

Sorry it should read

There are NO lithium costs on RRR's financial statement.

Banbury I do understand. RRR's financials are based on belief that the costs associated with lithium could not recovered. That decision was made at that point in time under market conditions which existed at that time. There is lithium costs on RRR's financial statement. That is reality and a fact.

Does the lithium material have a possible future year? Yes it does Should a company maintain the possibility of receiving that possible future value? Maybe depends on the holding cost etc. It appears that there were conversations with AB about that subject and that's fine but there are no lithium costs on RRR's financial statement. By all means you are entitled to prove me wrong but I have made a careful reading of RRR's financial statement and I dont see.

Other posters have also made similar comments that there is no recorded inventory

Banbury

Refined and process lithium has value and will always have some value.

Rocks (or other material) containing some lithium may or may not have value. In this case it has be transported to a refinery for further processing which costs money. The contained lithium within that material may or may not cover those costs. Given the small quantity (200 tonnes) with no prospect of ever receiving more of comparable material a refinery might not even be interested

I understand the discontent regarding RRR and its involvement with Lithium. People are entitled to make their own personal investment decisions (buy, sell or hold) based on what ever criteria they chose.

Personally I thought lithium as bad choice at the time and even if the lithium price recovers to an extent where it might be feasible to consider. My advice would dont. Focus on gold and DRC

No company writes off valuable assets, they write off worthless assets. RRR, with its auditors agreeing, made the determination that the lithium assets were worthless. I understand that in your opinion that asset was valuable but your opinion does not count.

There are often differences of opinion on value and that's ok but RRR gets to make the decision on IF it believes its own assets have value

Banbury Please do some research on accounting. You are essentially arguing that even if inventory has no value it must remain on the financial statement.

Inventory gets written off frequently

If the inventory has no value it must written off. The Lithium project and its associated costs (if on the asset side) were written off.

You can argue that some components had value and should have remained but that is not what RRR did

If RRR's management believe that the costs could be recovered then it must be written off

Blue boy The non issue is the lithium appearing as inventory on the financial statement. The lithium costs were written off. Consistent with that position there would be no amount shown as inventory.

The issue of credibility on 'exports' remains.

Would you agree that if the lithium costs were written off then there would be no amounts shown for inventory?

Nike exactly my point people are looking for something that is not there. Lithium was tried and failed. Forget about the inventory it is a non issue

bring on:

-DRC award

-sale of IC

-further news & results on BF work

Nike On June 30, 2024 audited financial statements the amount shown as inventory is:

ZERO

actually there is a complete absence Inventory is not even listed

Banbury you are correct (I was wrong-not the first time) RRR has a June 30th year end

here is time line

11/15/2023 RNS by RRR on export of Lithium

June 30, 2024 RRR's audited financial statement should contain Lithium inventory

No need to wait until June 2025, it should have already been done

IMO the inventory should have written off as worthless, RRR had a partner so why did RRR pay for the ore and shipping? Those costs should have been split

Greenland-why are there still costs?

lots of unanswered questions/issues etc

Distractions-all of the above are distractions. RRR, IMO, does a poor job communicating its story., Too much emphasis on activity. For mineral projects there is a lot of waiting, during which planning should take place

Helpful re audit and inventory check Since RRR has a Dec 31st year end shouldnt the inventory been verified as of Dec 31, 2024?