Member Info for straightntrue

I am about to post some in depth research I have done into the career of Bernard Aylward. They will be long and at times painful to get through but if you do manage to get through them you may pick up some useful bits along the way !!
GOOD LUCK !!!

Sorry just noticed my mistake - should read H2 and NOT H1 apologies !!!!

Some posters here seem to be suggesting that I do not believe that Kodal's DMS Plant will be producing IN 2020.
This is not the case and I merely called up the matter to show how dangerous it is to rely on out of date and potentially inaccurate information posted as being current.The report referenced stated that "the company has made significant progress .... towards bringing Bougouni into production by 2020."
Now the word I disputed was BY not IN - A very clear difference but lets take a quick look at that "production in Q1 2020" target and the chances of it being achieved.
Now the precedent that has been relied upon presumably is our Project Manager Steven Zaninovich at the Bald Hill Lithium DMS Project in Western Australia.
Now looking at official RNS documents construction started at the Project in July 2017
https://www.allianceminerals.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/4.-15-Aug-17-AMAL-and-Tawana-EPC-and-Construction-Commences-on-Lithium_Final.pdf SEE SHEETS 2/3
Production of lithium concentrate commenced on time in mid March 2018
https://www.allianceminerals.com.au/wp-content/uploads/wpallimport/files/109%20Lithium%20Production%20Commences%20at%20Bald%20Hill.pdf

Now from my way of thinking that entails a construction time of over eight months so to say Kodal will be producing in Q1 2020 is in my mind fanciful and H1 2020 or even Q4 2020 far more realistic since we have not even, at this point in time, entered our mining application let alone received the approval !!

Now I hold millions of shares in Kodal Minerals and I am NOT interested in de-ramping the share to buy in at a lower price or even to lower my average Instead I would prefer to keep the conversation on here to the honest truth and not about unattainable goals being put up as facts and likely results.

The next post will probably dash those hopes in an instant !!!

Interesting article but it is noteworthy for the omissions from the original report from which it has been taken which in itself raised the question as to how up to date the contained information actually is.
http://spintelligentpublishing.com/Digital/Mining-Review-Africa/issue52019/index.html?r=9 SEE PAGE 24
For example the opening headline paragraph finished with "the company has made significant progress .... towards bringing Bougouni into production by 2020"

BY 2020 ???? How long has that timeline been beyond the realms of possibility ?

The report goes on to state what the Company is doing at the present time but completely bypasses the ESIA which I think is not the "given" that some people are expecting it to be.After all it was matters that have a direct effect on this aspect of the project that Kodal took a year to correct when dispensing with the services of their contractor for a "lack of experienced technical staff mobilised to the project and a lack of focus on safe work practices and environmental awareness during surface mining activities." I have not as yet received a reply back from Kodal to my note asking for further details of this matter and my question as to whether Kodal actually discovered these deficiencies for themselves or were they pointed out by other more official bodies.Obviously my concerns that this whole affair could cause yet another delay to the long overdue ESIA approval contained in the same note remain unaddressed but hopefully I may receive a reply in the not too distant future !!
The article states that Kodal "commenced initial drilling (at Bougouni West) in April" but according to last Friday's Stock Market announcement it will now commence in early June 2019. More inaccurate information somewhere !!
The original report - not the article - goes on to state that Kodal "plans to undertake exploration work at its Diendio project before the end of the year."
With the Company reported as being funded until the granting of our mining licence that drilling would appear to need to be funded from the first cash raise AFTER the approval comes through and if that is the case then that puts almighty time pressure on that drilling actually happening this year so yet more out of date information in the report ?

In any case these reports and to that matter any interviews with various bodies have absolutely NO bearing to Kodal's progress.The Company continues along their path of telling one story to their shareholders via the media and a totally different story officially to the Stock Market.A recent point in case are the cosy chats in various broadcasts stating that the ESIA would be submitted BY the end of April closely followed by an RNS stating "by the end of Q2."

This shocking treatment of shareholders whilst prevalent in AIM Company's should not be tolerated any longer.

Drilling result not as good as hoped - only 18% interest so similar to Ascent in that they are not really masters of their own destiny !!!

Colin is just making the most financially out of the situation whilst he is able.He knows from last years AGM debacle that most shareholders want him out and will eventually succeed in doing that.He tried to circumvent that situation by lining up a replacement job only to find out that nobody else wanted him either and so decided,in my opinion,to just wring as much as he could out of his present job while the "going was good." As far as I am concerned he is not the only one doing that at Ascent and for me the jury is very much out on both of our latest executive appointments.If JB is so excited about the assets of the Company and reckons it could be hugely undervalued why has he not bought shares at the bargain price.Similarly why has our other new appointment not done the same having apparently said at the Investor Presentation held shortly after his appointment that he would do so as soon as he was able ? And before anybody shouts "closed period" that seems to last 13 months a year at Ascent.

Previously tried to contact him in a COURTEOUS and CIVIL way on similar matters but unfortunately had similar response to others on here - TOTAL SILENCE.

Getting a little bit annoying having so many incorrect figures being thrown about regarding Hutchinson's remuneration so I looked into Kashdog's assertion that Hutchinson gives good value for his remuneration and that anybody that did comparative research would see that for themselves. That is exactly what I did and this is what I found !!!
As you very well know Ascent is a somewhat unique O&G Company in that it is debt free and revenue producing so a straight comparison to another sector company is not possible so I just literally pulled a name out of mid air for a "loose" comparison.The name that I chose was Jersey Oil and Gas PLC who I will refer to as simply JOG.The CEO of JOG - Andrew Benitz - and Hutchinson have been in the roles for around the same length of time but that is where the similarity ends.Latest JOG Financial Report shows that Benitz received a salary of £175K for the 2018 calendar year against £159,804 received by Hutchinson.However for a lengthy period of the year Hutchinson was only part time actually at home on gardening leave with his feet up whilst he tried to find another job.He unfortunately came back full time when it dawned on him that nobody else wanted him so really a maximum salary of £120K should have been paid for his "services." On further investigation over the tenure of their employment Benitz has received total remuneration of £410K against £670K for Hutchinson. Benitz has re-invested £157K of his remuneration back into the company stock whereas Hutchinson has begrudgingly re-invested a measly £23K. Benitz now holds 2.88% of his employing company's stock against a pathetic 0.126% holding of Hutchinson.And how has the share price reacted since they took on their respective roles ? JOG has gone from 25 pence to £1.55 at the end of 2018 - had been over £3 in 2017 - whereas Hutchinson has taken Ascent from 2.30 pence to 0.35 pence over EXACTLY the same period.So JOG has gone UP over SIXFOLD whereas Ascent has LOST around 85% of its value.And before anyone shouts about the subsequent collapse in the JOG share price the lead contractor did declare a somewhat disappointing drilling result but the JOG share price is still up THREEFOLD and looking to head further up.
In summation it appears to me that one of the gentlemen concerned is doing everything possible to ensure the success of their company to the benefit of ALL shareholders whereas the other is simply milking the shareholders for their own gain.
Now which one of the two would you prefer to be looking after your investments ?

In light of the incompetence shown by our Board of Directors's when taking a whole year to sack a dangerous contractor - see Kodal's words used in the RNS released last Friday,I have been looking again at the history of our CEO Bernard Aylward. One of the things which has always struck me as strange was that when he joined from Taruga Gold Limited he was allowed to continue his directorship at Taruga. When getting a new more influential job - promotion for the sake of a better word - normally the individual concerned would and indeed should sever all ties with the first company.In actual fact Aylward seemingly continued with his full responsibilities at Taruga Gold endorsing their progress and indeed qualified the assets of their next acquisition as Taruga's "Competent Person"
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20170524/pdf/43jgb80ghvrzx3.pdf SEE PAGE 4
In addition to this he continued to add to his already large shareholding in Taruga Gold
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20160615/pdf/437x648chv8w70.pdf
Lots of people will say that is irrelevant and I myself was not overly worried but that concern was upped a notch when,as a director of Taruga Aylward announced in late 2017 that they had acquired three Exploration Tenements in Western Australia looking for Lithium deposits.
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20171026/pdf/43nlpr03l03xpb.pdf
As if that was not concerning enough they had previously announced their attention to buy into a Lithium permit area in The Democratic Republic of Congo. Aylward once again took on the role of the "Competent Person" in the report on the potential target area
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20171005/pdf/43mzb5450mbyb2.pdf

Now in my opinion there is a clear conflict of interests here and when you consider he has a 3.4% interest in the now renamed Taruga Minerals limited as at 26 September 2018
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20180928/pdf/43ys41lhp4xf80.pdf SEE PAGE 63
Aylward has 1.5 million "Performance Shares" at no doubt ultra low conversion price if any
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20180928/pdf/43ys41lhp4xf80.pdf SEE PAGE 27
So Aylward will have an approximate holding of 4.5% in Taruga against a holding of 1.15% in Kodal Minerals which does raise the question of as to which company will receive his greatest endeavours ?

Certainly something has caused Aylward to take his eyes off the "Kodal ball" with possibly catastrophic results.Using his words from the last RNS - " the lack of experienced technical staff mobilised to the project and a lack of focus on safe work practices and environmental awareness during surface mining activities"
Could these practices have been discovered by outsiders doing work on the ESIA and caused the further delay in submitting that document ? Or was the next outside job taken on in January 2018 by Aylward at Lachlan Star Limited disclosed on Page 20 of the latest Taruga Minerals Accounts although not disclosed to Kodal shareholders the cause of the loss of concentr

HeresHopin - Because I am fed up with newbies with no knowledge of the company or its history coming on here stating that there is no alternative but to accept the Director's wishes.As for my posting history I don't see that not suffering from verbal diarrhoea somehow affects my right to post at all.

WHYAST1605 - Well this makes a mockery of the whole thing and just backs up my feelings regarding incomplete and inaccurate information being supplied to the shareholders.
One thing that does stick out like a sore thumb is the reduction in price achieved between September and October.It goes against all common sense and the supply and demand theory as when a product is needed more then the price of the product should go UP and not collapse DOWN !!! The regularly reported European wholesale price of gas follows that theory so why does our price not.So many things need explaining BEFORE any meeting not AFTER it.

stockdale - Unfortunately the Directors have avoided saying that the funds would only be used for advancing the project so in my opinion the resolution should be voted down.Past record shows that as soon as they have the power to allot then they will do so at the earliest opportunity and not always in the shareholders best interests.This whole process has been rushed through using scare tactics to enable them to get their power back instead of a conservative approach of formulating EXACTLY where the money would be spent and THEN call the meeting to discuss any potential fund raising.In my opinion the Directors are doing all this back to front for purely selfish reasons

So let's look at the reason put forward by the Board to try to persuade us shareholders to give them back the power to place securities without consultation.
From the Chairman's letter to shareholders it should be noted how far short of the 75% needed to pass the resolution the Directors actually were even allowing for any "adjustments" that MAY have been made !! Anyway the Chairman went on to say and I quote :-
" We will continue to pursue all available avenues to secure the final award of both permits and we remain committed to develop the Petišovci project to its full potential whether with a partner or independently." and further
" the Board cannot raise additional equity capital without a further vote by Ascent shareholders at a General Meeting. This effectively prevents the Company from raising funds as an alternative to a carrying out a transaction from the Strategic Review."
Now forgive me if I am wrong but when the Strategic Review was initiated all the interviews given by CH seemed to back up the widely held opinion that the purpose of it was to get the Company's assets sold or if that was not possible a joint venture entered into.The suggestion that going onto develop the field independently was dismissed as a non-starter and yet the Chairman is now putting it forward as a viable scenario !!! Seeing how Ascent is being vilified in the Government backed Slovenian press and being portrayed as the Devil incarnate anybody that thinks that Ascent will EVER strike up a good working relationship with the Slovenian Government in my opinion are delusional especially when you realise it is that the permit we are fighting to get is not even in our name !!!
In the letter he goes on to say :-
"This situation weakens the negotiating position of the Board with parties in the Strategic Review."
The idea that Ascent not having this power somehow weakens their position in negotiations is simply too ridiculous to be true and I note that even supporters of the BOD have agreed on this point.
And in an unwarranted and childish dig at those that DEMOCRATICALLY voted the resolution down the Chairman added in his letter :-
"It also reduces our ability to pursue the necessary permits in Slovenia given the need to conserve cash resources."
I have NEVER proposed anything to cause this and would gladly fund the Company to achieve these results.

We do not know the Slovenian Government position on the subject of the permits and of course the central figure in this confusion has unprofessionally been out of contact since releasing the bombshell story.Furthermore,even on Company released info Ascent is holding its head above water as its cash balances have not diminished over the last three months so we do not need any funding on economic grounds and if they push ahead with the ill-timed and ill-advised General Meeting and get defeated then a possible result of this may well be the weakening of the Company's power so as in the post's title WHY THE HURRY

I kept a low profile here yesterday solely due to the fear of being banned.I posted a series of FACTS on Friday afternoon which somebody on here resented being aired on a public forum and that individual had sufficient power to get my post removed.I see that other posters have provided more information to confirm the FACTS I stated in my forcibly removed post so I turn my attention to the proposed restoration of director's power to place shares without the need to consult the Company's owners - US shareholders - beforehand.For those new to the board the original removal of these rights was borne out of shareholder's frustration at both the lack of progress on the project but more importantly because of the constant feeding of incomplete and misleading information announced by the Board of Directors.This has raised its ugly head again in the recent letter sent to shareholders by our Chairman and in the last RNS released by our CEO regarding revenues.In these documents they stated that gas pumped in October was TREBLE that pumped in September and yet the revenues generated would only be DOUBLE that achieved in the previous month.NO reason was given for that discrepancy so why has our selling price been reduced by 33% against a backdrop of steadily increasing European gas prices ? Is it a mistake or is it a penalty inflicted on us by INA for failing to produce the contracted volume of gas ? Surely an explanation is required from the Directors ?
Returning to the subject of shareholder's frustration this was further evidenced by the ousting of Hutchinson from his job on postal votes cast at the last AGM before the underhand change of voting procedures were adopted to save his skin !!!! I sincerely hope that this perversion of DEMOCRACY is not enacted at the forthcoming General Meeting.
Shortage of the necessary space required entails a further post !!!!!

Mystified as to why my earlier post has been removed as all it contained was FACTS and nothing else !!!
CH WAS voted out of his job by the shareholders in their postal votes and the powers that be DID overrule the DEMOCRATIC wishes by changing to a show of hands resolution.It would appear that CH/CC may read these pages and want to hide the truth from shareholders.

In the latest interview CH says :-
"We have cash, but it won’t last forever, so it is prudent to have these rights."
However in Wednesday's RNS he stated that :-
"At 30 June 2018 we reported cash of GBP577,000 of which GBP226,000 was reported as cash and GBP351,000 was restricted cash held on deposit under the terms of our Gas Sales Agreement. At 30 September 2018 we have cash of GBP579,000, of this GBP401,000 is reportable as cash and GBP178,000 is restricted cash held on deposit under the terms of the Gas Sales Agreement."
and more relevant :-
"Cash generated in Slovenia from operations currently more than covers all of our local operating costs while expenditure in the UK has been reduced significantly."

In my opinion there is absolutely no justification for this General Meeting and potential fund raising to be even discussed at this moment in time before official confirmation of the permit situation has been received from the Slovenian Government.I believe CH/CC are using these scare tactics to get their fund raising capabilities restored and from the looks of other comments on this board it looks like their "Project Fear" is working !!

The following is an excerpt from Wednesday's RNS :-
"Total production for September was 232,228 cubic metres (8,201 Mcf) an average of 1.1 MMscfd, and revenue for the month was EUR69,559.

Total production in October has increased to 679,191 cubic metres (23,866 Mcf) an average of 0.9 MMscfd and revenue for the month is expected to be EUR149,000."

How can we produce TREBLE the gas but our income is only DOUBLE despite the European price of gas going up ?
Has Colin recommenced putting half truths in his statements ?

This is the AST board and speaking as one of the many millions of so called idiots who saw the light kindly keep your comments to AST and not deviate away from AST.

And anybody wondering whether it was a straight forward mistake or had some sinister motives one only has to look at who the NOMAD is here and all doubts would be removed

Deservedly rough ride coming at the AGM I think for BA.All the drilling and that's the best that they can come up with ?