Member Info for Stas20

Someone has been triggered, let's put it out plainly, frankyee is a troll of the highest order. He lies, cheats, manipulates does whatever it takes to try an earn a buck on the back of others with absolute zero regard for anyone else, as to him all alias's are just anonymous nobody's. He will use any and all of his alias's to help achieve what he hopes for, including sending messages to others saying he hopes they lose the lot and no ends of other disgusting thoughts. If Admin took time to police these boards he would have been banned and reported to whatever authority could deal with his like a long time ago. When he grows up and looks back on life he may just see.

Yes, and not really sure why he always has a need to post mutiple times when one, or actually indeed none, would be more enlightening for this board.

"Tekcapital plc reported a net asset decrease of US$15 million for the year ended December 31, 2025"

- I told you all this was coming, however what was the surprise was the reasoning, microsalt, so this is bad as my expectation is still a similar rightdown on the back of guident which has been heavily overvalued in the portfolio and TEK will have to at some point make amends for that, their carrying value is far to high.

"I hope you lose everything it’s what you deserve aycuramba"

- that's a pretty nasty thing to say to someone, actually its about as low a comment I have seen here - you should really reflect on that comment and what it might mean to the person, their family friends etc. were such a thing to happen.

What you mean like a boiler room hired to push a narrative with each taking turns...hmmm

Interesting that none of the discord crew ever come on here anymore to support the directors. Also, their voices are now absent in their protection of PB not buying shares - somthing he continually promised to do but didn't - yet not one of the syscophants could bring themselves to call him out for that.

Well purebond obviously has faith to put a lot more into TXP and they will not just be looking at the increased oil price, the hopefully increased output post CR3 cleanup and compressor install, but will be already looking towards the renogotiated gas prices which will no doubt be on the card pretty shortly.

Nice to see some good news for a change, starting to feel like PB is trying to show we might be in the turnaround year.

This is going to pickup imo

Is this the signal to let the brakes off. Someone thinks this is all the reward they need wonder why.

Thanks for your guidance frankyee, you're just so smart....afterwards

Frankyee, nee aligator, nee rossanan - you seem to have almost wet yourself with the number of posts since the decline in shareprice, you have such a caring nature, a truly good human we can tell. How's TEK doing btw.

That's a lot of director snouts in the trough, still might let the sp run now, greed greed greed

More funny how aligator nee frankyee come out to comment on a down day when they have no interest other than hating on TXP as previously stated when they were using their third alias - pretty disgusting behaviour but par for their course.

And a mkt cap now less than it paid for the central block

Well once again it's all eyes to the next set of results, next quarter will incorportate the middle east war premiums in oil and should have some good news (hopefully) on the compressor installation. PB knows how to push things down the road for sure.

"Regrettably, no." - and yet you still don't think an open letter is of value. You're just shouting in the forest and the only people getting hit are the shareholders you are trying to protect!

For my part, my concern has been exactly as stated: that public pressure should be constructive, clearly aimed at improving the outcome, and not simply add to fear among retail holders. If the pressure results in better disclosure, better terms, stronger shareholder protections, or a fairer deal overall, then I would welcome that. My only point throughout has been that the criticism needs to be matched by a clear remedy.

As for “skin in the game”, I do not think a shareholder has to publish their holding on a public bulletin board to ask a reasonable question. The point stands or falls on its merits. But yes, if it gives you any comfort, I am a shareholder. I do not generally comment on stocks where I have no position.

My agenda is straightforward: I want the best achievable outcome for all ordinary shareholders, and I do not want retail investors frightened into selling by a campaign that is strong on accusation but still unclear on remedy.

As for the aspects of the RAM deal investors are likely most concerned about, I would say they are fairly obvious:

the apparent transfer of majority project economics for what many see as inadequate consideration;

ZIOC potentially being reduced to a much smaller minority exposure to its only real asset;

the lack of full clarity around RAM / Greymont / GIS and associated interests;

whether shareholders are being given enough disclosure before any vote;

whether there should be independent valuation or stronger minority shareholder protection;

and whether the current structure is genuinely the best available route, or merely the one now being presented as inevitable.

So no, I do not think “resistance is futile”. Nor do I object to pressure being applied by legitimate means.

But I do think pressure should be tied to a clear, constructive objective. That could be fuller disclosure, independent valuation, revised terms, stronger retained economics, better shareholder protections, or some combination of those.

Your London analogy is interesting, but it misses the point. You have described the possible modes of travel. What shareholders still need to understand is the destination. Is “London” revised terms? More disclosure? Blocking the deal? Regulatory intervention? RAM stepping back? A white knight? Something else?

Saying “there are many routes” is fine. But unless the destination is clear, shareholders are being asked to support a journey without knowing where it is supposed to end.

I respect the “why”. I am still asking for clarity on the “what”.

My concern is not with shareholders applying pressure. My concern is with pressure that is highly effective at creating fear, but still vague on what success actually looks like.

If the RAM deal has damaged confidence, then an undefined campaign of further alarm risks reinforcing the very downward pressure it claims to oppose. That may not be the intention, but it is a fair concern when retail selling appears to be the visible result.

If the objective is to improve the outcome for minority shareholders, then surely the remedy needs to be at least as clear as the criticism.