Member Info for specinvestor99

IMO this is a good word when describing RRR and its actions towards collecting the DRC cash.

AB tweet "we're on it'

this lacks any context. Why do you say its about DRC?

If it is about the DRC it implies that previously AB was not on it.

Helpful you stated that 'connected parties' would have to be disclosed.

Disclosed where? by RRR in its filings?

LOL The main advisor to RRR is a company called

"Be Broke Capital Advisors"

now we know why RRR has been making those decisions

Helpful readers understand your posts. However that does not mean they accept your argument ie RRR is undervalued

RRR is not in a good place and has not been in a good place for very very long time. (hence the declining share price)

I think the contrary position is more accurate which is--Why does not Helpful understand the points being made here that RRR has issues-significant issues -particularly regarding credibility

Zumore IMO you are of line with these statement

As I posted previously the mere taking of a picture of a child working does not imply the person(s) taking the picture are employing child labor.

By your reasoning anyone taking a picture of a fire, car crash, injury is the person responsible for such action.

The war in Ukraine would exist with or without pictures or video.

This is despicable

IMO this issue is not really relevant. Why? a-not much is going on with ALR

RRR can update the % of its affiliates every 6 months as part of its financial reporting

IMO the more relevant issues are:

1)- DRC arbitration and cash- timing and associated things which need to be done to get cash

2)- RRAL-$250,00 payment and plans. What happened to the NDA's and the party or parties who were interested months ago

3) Ivory Coast/ BF person on site? what is the possibility of gold production?

IMO those 3 factors could mover the RRR share price.

On Nov 6 th RRR announced "Final arbitration meeting possibly next week"'

Has is taken place?

I understand the moving parts which have to come together and why. DRC and its governing people have lots to do. If they want to get this done this they have to make it happen. My fear is they dont really want it happen so excuses are easy to make (there is always something else or somewhere else one or more parties have to do and go). There are multiple parts so they each can take a turn with different reasons

Effectively the DRC can make arbitration a place where disputes are left unresolved and DRC gets say that it has a 'justice system'

Justice delayed is Justice denied

LOL I have a TV show on major network on child labor. Do you think they TV show paid them?

This board is laughable

by all means notify all companies of the following

-No children in pictures This could imply children working which is a big no no

As you long as your at it add the following

-No women- women have been sexualized far too long

-no people at all -Since some people believe that their souls are taken by pictures we must be sensitive to that fact

-no landmarks at all- this represents cultural exploitation for personal gratification

-no geotags at all- locations can be exploited and places targeted so this should be eliminated

What is permitted:

pictures of sun to show you out in the day light or

a picture of a star (singlular) to show you were out at a night. Pictures of more than one star is prohibited because it would represent wealth or plenty which would insensitive of those in need

No pictures of food, water or beverages of any kind which should show insensitivity to those hungry or thirty

Bit coin

You just missing estimating the number of bit coin miners the number of bit coins produced

lets say RRR produced just one bit coin per day $9000 daily/$360,000 month about $4 million a year.

RRR plans to start with 10!!!!!! RRR will make over $40 million. with a Mkt Cap of just 2.5 the returns will be incredible

I dont understand why the price is so low!!! It must be: a-paid bashers or b-evil market makers

full disclosure I help RRR bit coin mining so I know what I am talk about

***

The above is satire and is not meant to be taken seriously. I am not a bit coin miner. and to the best of my knowledge neither is RRR

Nike the continued lack of comment on insider posting on this forum is noted

Nike My LOL was directed to Helpful and is scarsism and is meant as ridicule. Previously Helpful posted that Canadians would have no concept of what UK insider trading would be. As I posted following the LOL the UK definition is very similar to the Canadian which should be of no surprise considering Canada after all is part of the British Commonwealth

Again the substance of my comments is that Helpful is an insider, he is posting and the price of RRR shares have changed

It is not relevant if you or Helpful believes the information is relevant or not. That would be the defense. In Canada these are administrative charges meaning you pay the fine and then file a legal claim for to get your money back. UK is probably different but simply getting charged is typically a black mark for a financial professional.

Obviously Helpful does not care

Helpful LOL The FCA definition is exactly what I thought it would be.

Surprise Its like Canada

Here it is

Part I Definition

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) defines insider dealing as the illegal trading of assets or stock by individuals who have access to private company information. This information, known as inside information, is non-public and could impact the company's valuation and share price if it were made public.

Part II Application

II A -Is Helpful an insider Yes- He has confirmed

Ii B- Has Helpful posted information, views or opinions Yes

III C- Has the stock price moved Yes the stock price has moved

Summary

Insider trading cases are easy in Canada and given the UK definition it would be easy in the UK as well.

Helpful is lucky this is an AIM stock with low visibility with the regulatory bodies

Helpful LOL The FCA definition is exactly what I thought it would be.

Surprise Its like Canadas

Here it is

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) defines insider dealing as the illegal trading of assets or stock by individuals who have access to private company information. This information, known as inside information, is non-public and could impact the company's valuation and share price if it were made public.

Nike/Helpul- thank you for the non response response regarding insider trading.

FYI -Canada is part of the British Commonwealth and its law was based on British law

Bottom line

Does the UK allow insider to make written opinions or views regarding a company where they have insider information?

Nike There is no 'conflation'. You are wrong. Of course, Helpful can offer a defense of "I am only expressing my view or opinion"

I have been an insider in a number of public companies and in every single company insiders were told not express views or opinions on the share or the company. Helpful will do what he chooses and I am only expressing my opinion that he should not.

I understand that you disagree. However what is the prudent course of action? Who pays the legal fees if an insider investigation were to be launched. Helpful would pay. His choice and his risk. Good luck to Helpful

Helpful re "insider information" you posted "My having a view or an opinion is not inside information."

I disagree with your statement. You are an insider by virtue of your ownership of companies affiliated with RRR as well as your position as creditor in which you receive information. You have confirm this yourself.

Therefore your opinions and views are in fact based on that insider information. That insider information forms the basis of your view or opinion. They can not be separated

An insider can not express a view or opinion that RRR is a 'good place" or the shares should be purchased and then avoid liability by claiming "i am free to express my opinion without any liability'. If such a position were valid no one could ever be prosecuted for insider trading violations.

Robins I understand your sentiment but there is no free lunch. I would love to invest in a public company, have the CEO work for free, fund the costs and avoid any possible dilution but it does not work work that way EVER

I have no idea of the personal financial resources of AB to evaluate if he could even work for free. AB would still have his personal costs to pay and that money has to come from somewhere. For most people those personal costs are covered by a paycheck

In any even the issue was brought up to AB with a no answer. IMO there is no point in repeating the question and hoping to get a different result (one definition of insanity)

Robbins I just dont understand the mentality that someone who works a public for profit company should work for free.

I chose to remain a shareholder. I disagree with the approach of picking up additional projects in different countries particularly AFTER the DRC

I also recognize that I have limited information and there are facts and details which would have influenced the decisions that RRR historically made.

AB just like anyone deserves to get paid.

The time it takes to resolve issues/disputes in foreign countries (DRC) and the need for the CEO to be there is exactly why a small company like RRR should not be involved in multiple countries