Member Info for stephen_pearce

Zumore Last years coal projects we're RGM taking a 25% position directly with the vendor - SM, whom was an unknown to RGM. This new coal project is RGM & Legacy Hill via a JV company taking 100% of the asset. LH are known to RGM, thus the whole process and asset is within control of known entities. Colin Legacy Hill are a 13 person management team - http://legacyhillresources.com/who-we-are BooBoo No-one is saying you can buy a coal mine for $3m. See Okenia's extensive posts previously to explain who that works. But RGM confirmed their CASH element of the JV funding. Therefore one could assume there will also be some project level debt financing. AB stated in his latest interview that RGM do not need to further finance the coal themselves.

New coal JV company, Mining Equity Trust. (MeT) 53% owned by Legacy Hill 47% owned by RGM MeT funding in place, $3m cash on account. MeT specifically set up to acquire US operating met coal assets, operated by Legacy Hill. You don't have to like the RGM management, you don't have to like RGM's other assets. An investment into RGM, is an investment (soon) into an operating coal mine and Legacy Hill's management.

Over recent weeks/ months, a number of people have asked me the same question. One that I've never answered, and one that I won't ever answer. I remember a number of years ago, in an interview Paul Johnson was asked the same question, and his reply was something along the lines of.... "I won't answer, because you could say no every time, but the one time you dont answer, everyone will assume its a yes"

Excellent posts, Okenia !

RGM have invested $2m into the JV Co, not $1.6m Legacy Hill have invested $1m into the JV Co, as RNS'd by RGM So, cash consideration part of the coal mine deal is $3m

It's not against AIM rules at all. Take MTR as example, they have a portfolio of non disclosed positions

You have no clue how much cash RGM have, and the value/ number of shares they own in either declared or non declared listed companies.

BooBoo, you don't agree that the loan can't be converted for 6 months?

You do realise that no conversions can take place for 6 months ?

On it's way And damn good loan terms too. 130% of vwap Well negotiated deal.

SM couldn't get BIA listed on LSE He then tried Whetstone on NEX and was blocked He's now managed to list Flagship on OTC Pink Sheets in the US. SM's Davis Tract asset was being used in each listing attempt. I do know Earley was sniffing around SM's assets a while back. RGM's coal projects via SM were never part of any of the above either. RGM's new upcoming coal project isn't anything to do with SM either, entirely new partners/ vendors. Now, looking at the timing of SM's failed listings, and events with our own coal projects, you can see that SM was effectively relying on BIA listing last summer. He needed funds, presumably already had those funds spent in advance.

http://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=RGM&ArticleCode=2iu77uw9&ArticleHeadline=Holdings_in_Company

I've had a few conversations about this over recent years, and it can be quite a polarising subject. I believe In-Situ metal value is a very useful metric than an investor can quickly calculate to see whether there's enough potential to warrant more research. Of course In-Situ value isn't the same as NPV, far from it, but in the absence of either a Scoping Study, PFS, DFS, BFS, then In-Situ value is the only number an investor can refer to. Plus, it's a useful tool to quickly compare projects & companies, for example. RGM Mcap �4.4m Motzfeldt $120 billion In-situ value @ 100% Mambare $17 billion In-Situ value @ 50% No NPV MTR/MOD Combined mcap �77m Botswana $3 billion In-situ value @ 100% NPV $281m GEO Mcap �14.5m Kvemo $95 million In-situ value @ 50% No NPV SAV Mcap �39m Oman $129 million @ 51% No NPV Those figures aren't opinion, they're fact. In-situ value doesn't account for CAPEX, OPEX, jurisdiction, infrastructure etc. As an aside, calculating the actual metal content and value serves to make an investor realise just how much, or little metal there is contained in a JORC/ 43-101 resource. It's a bug bear of mine, and just an opinion, but I'm fairly sure there's too many investors who don't understand JORC figures. A recent GEO RNS's headline said... "Georgian Mining Corporation ('GEO' or the "Company') is pleased to announce a 41% tonnage increase in the global In-Pit Optimised constrained copper-gold sulphide Mineral Resource for the Kvemo Bolnisi Project ('KB') to 1.7Mt @ 1.05% Cu from 1.2Mt @ 1.03% Cu. " An investor might think there's 1.7 million tonne of Copper there, but we all know it means there really is 17,850 tonnes. Quite a difference eh. Anyway I digress... So whilst In-situ value isn't to be confused with NPV, nevertheless it is very useful to calculate.

20 times in the last 24 hrs. Can you guess what??

I know the RGM share price can be hard to swallow, but calling in the FSA is a bit strong

"I think what we have learnt here is if we are to make a go of it with this type of coal we are eventually going to have to get our hands on a highwaller with a team to operate it and $3m won't touch the sides" lol, just LOL I'm sooooo gonna screenshot that

Yup Off down the dealership tomorrow, using my RGM stock as collateral :)

You're going to have to dust off your rockets and BOOMs !!

Oh Colin, Colin, Colin.... You have to read that line from the viewpoint of those caped crusaders

I've had a wry smile on my face reading you lot this aft. You're a wee band of caped crusaders, protecting the great unwashed. By my reckoning, you've 2,3,4 weeks to enjoy yourselves. So crack on chaps.