Member Info for Stackhigh

So if you can get in at sub 5p, there is money to be made here. And the way things are going, that won't be too hard.

Let's say the next three rounds of financing sees Jiangxi move up to 25% (unlikely). By then, thanks to raises at low sp, it'll only cost them £150m to take out the rest. For those who cry "but bhp won't let this happen", they absolutely will. Since we've learned how hard this is going to be to extract, they've shown no interest whatsoever.

Spoiler- they are not going to pay 300m, let alone 500, 750 etc. If you believe they will then fill your boots at 30p+, but don't claim nobody warned you.

Thanks bozi and addict for confirming what I already knew- I have and continue to call it right. As that continues to be the case into the future, you'll see it's far from guesswork. I clearly understand the company better than anyone who insisted there would be a sale last year, and better than anyone claiming there will be one this year. To claim otherwise is to ignore the facts in favour of hopefulness, which puts you in the same category as novice, slug, bbg et al. You can, and should, do better.

Friendly advice- get you money out and buy a load more shares at a lower price soon 👍

You're asking the wrong questions, add, like every other ramper here. Don't ask why hasn't there been a sale up to now. Ask "why would anyone bail solg out at this stage"? It's not about de-risking, it's about corporate stability. With DC at the helm the markets saw stability. With the current crop of sp crashing clowns, the markets see instability. Why move now? Wait a year, two years, pick up percentages through cheap dilution... That's what the Chinese investors did and will continue to do. Someone will get whatever is left of solg pretty cheap. Fort's "no one gets a tier 1 cheap" is nonsense - we don't have a mine to sell. We have a series of difficult infrastructure problems to solve, with a distant payday in an uncertain copper/gold market. Everyone knows solg can't do much from their current position, so as had been proven again and again, everyone is willing to sit and wait. Give it a year or two (no sooner) and I'm sure we'll be forced into a sale. Until then, it's all just wishful bbg-style claptrap. Mark my words- I've called it perfectly so far.

You are so true to type, bbg- you don't even try to disguise it. It's almost endearing.

You've said the same thing dozens of times before, and been wrong every time, numb skull. Anyone who can brave trawling through your old posts will see exactly that.

If you are for real, Roxi, I'd urge caution as it's likely you'll over-pay for your shares. Wait a few weeks and get more shares for less cash.

If you're just a ramper though, pretending to top up to try and induce FOMO and dupe others into parting with their money into a precarious company, you can f*** off.

Where are the new posters ramping this share this week? "It's clear we've seen the bottom now". Indeed we did- we saw a lot of ar$es and brainless ramping.

As the sensible posters here have said many times: don't get over excited. This has further it can fall. Back into the 6s today, within a week of pfs, is good proof of that.

Where's novice and his 'onwards and upwards'? That usually foretells a drop.

I'll just leave this here. Case closed 🙂

Slug, because of his lack of education and propensity to be taken in by hoaxes and conspiracy theories, has fallen for a classic.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water-fuelled_car#:~:text=Most%20proposed%20water%2Dfuelled%20cars,used%20to%20produce%20net%20energy

So it doesn't 'run on water' (your exact claim)? Because breaking bonds in a stable oxide is an endothermic process that will never be able to do mechanical work? So you were wrong? That's a start, slug: well done.

And you don't have monthly data but you're willing to believe it exists and stake your reputation on it, even though the data actually produced by global financial institutions (which is quarterly and freely available, as I kindly showed) proved you were wrong? Interesting way to 'research', that... 🤣

Google doesn't feature in any of these things you've said but then been unable to evidence, so your reference to it being 'bent' seems moot.

Are you getting it yet, slug? You're not bright enough to play this game. You say things that are easy to disprove, hoping you won't be challenged, and when you're shown to be thick you lash out with hilarious threats of physical harm. You're a mess, mate.

So, do you have a suggestion of a search engine that will back up any of the incorrect claims you've made? Or is this another attempt at diversion? It's okay to just admit you're wrong, slug. Your "I'm right according to less common search engines that I can't name" defence could be seen as a bit infantile. Like resorting to offering fights in carparks or claiming you're 'big and powerful'...!

Substantiate the Thatcher thing, or the water engine thing, or any of your other claims. It's easy- there are books about these things in libraries 🙂. Or don't: each failure to substantiate claims I've been easily able to disprove just helps to prove how thick you are. Today's brain fart about firing our Ecuadorian staff is the latest in a long line.

Sorry, I nearly missed the return of the tough guy act! Welcome back, incel 'roid rage! You are ADORABLE 🥰

We're all very scared. What did you say you are? Definitely 6ft 9 and 350lbs, yes? And a cage fighting judo expert who also owns 4 pitbulls and a tank? 🤣

After your attempts to distract from your misunderstanding of our corporate responsibilities in Ecuador, you said something unintelligible about search engines other than Google. Presumably because that's where you find your misinformation. So I asked:

Which search engine will return results that say the carbon to oxygen double bonds in CO2 DON'T absorb in the part of the electromagnetic spectrum that the earth emits in?

If you can't find one (just like you mysteriously couldn't find data to back up your false Thatcher claims we've not forgotten), you have to admit that you're wrong about yet another conspiracy theory you've fallen for.

So no answers, slug? Just insults? Seems about right. You're not smart enough to read, let alone argue using evidence. Enjoy your ignorance 👍, but beware the chap selling you the magic beans. If you buy your flat earth nonsense, you are a prime mark.

Haha!!

As ever: slug is confronted with facts, doesn't want to refine his thinking so lashes out. A tale as old as time.

Can't say I didn't try to educate you. Some people's ignorance is not a sin but a trade.

You have no idea whether I've actually sold my shares or not 🙂

They reduced staffing to save costs, but there are thresholds of staffing they're not going to be able to dip below. I don't expect you to understand (see previous post regarding your proven ineptitude).

I'll make it simple for you sluggy - an 'out' from your hole, if you will. Which search engine will return results that say the carbon to oxygen double bonds in CO2 DON'T absorb in the part of the electromagnetic spectrum that the earth emits in. Show me that, and I'll show you a source of your problem with facts.

Google is grand thanks, but Springer, Wiley and OUP don't make all of their stuff available open source. Helps to have a library log in. Have you heard of libraries? Did they have them at your 'university', or was it mostly just crayons and safety scissors?

You don't - that doesn't make them optional. Just like it's not an option to default on loans or break environmental codes, without sinking the company.

I realise you're probably upset like the others here, but it seems strange that an investor would suggest a means of sinking the company when in reality we are just heading for a car crash of a fundraise (as I predicted).

As for how thick you are, slug... Who is to say? You've said some bonkers things but I've always assumed it was a combination of attention seeking and lack of education/critical thinking. Maybe you just say these things because you're plain dense. Who knows? Either way, well will add today's stupidity outburst to the growing list of things that prove you're thick as treacle.

"And sack the rest of the Ecuadorean bum scratchers and call off all exploratory work. Cash bleed should be nowhere near $1m per month"

Realise you just wanted to get your favourite phrase in, denigrating local staff (don't worry slug, I'm sure mummy thinks your funny? 🤷‍♀️) but please, explain exactly how this would fit with our agreed investor commitments?

You can't, because it doesn't, but then you're never one to let the facts get in the way of your posts are you, sluggish?

For further evidence, see your posts about GDP under Thatcher (wrong), temperature 'not being a measure of anything' (direct quote, there was no additional context - wrong), CO2 isn't linked to global temperatures (wrong), Toyota developing an engine that 'runs on water' (hilariously wrong).

Just reality I think, Roxi. The SP is sliding without covgaz providing any influence. Only a total whackjob thinks what is said here influences the share price. What it does do, sadly, is convince some vulnerable newbies to invest based on demonstrable lies from callous twats here. Should those posters do better research? Yes. But let's not victim shame. If you believed bbg, fort, red etc we would have sold 5 times over by now!

Reality is that we'll do a fundraise, it will be brutal (remember how bad 17p seemed?) and these same people will be posting the same nonsense this time next year. Mark my words- I've not been wrong yet.

Another corker from bbg. Him and novice are desperate to mix it with the rampers but their tiny child brains just can't quite manage to give them anything believable to say.

Bbg, I'll make it simple. Solg can't sell cascabel, which they've spent millions de-risking. Do you honestly think there's a queue for porvenir?