We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
I have a lot of reasons to hope I am wrong here.
But surely now, & with this fast moving along to talk of auctions etc.
If you have ever attended a house "do it upper" one. You will know that if there is a reserve (if?). It will go for that unless there is competition.
I assume the reserve is the sum of the monies owed. So unless there are more than one suitor. Why would anyone pay more sensibly. Regardless of the fact the resource potential may warrant it we may feel....
Sorry, been too busy to follow the events fully. So maybe there is some clauses that can/will prevent the cheapest sell off. Happy to be corrected 100%.... But if not, then surely a distressed sale is just that, so seriously, talk of someone paying anything close to our perceived value is not realistic - unless, as said, there is more than one of them in for it?
Interesting trading patterns today. Someone selling clips of 2k, 5k, 12k, 5k and repeat all day. These at 1.4725, 1.47 etc.
Price didn't move as one may expect. I guess due to the 1m and 1.5m buys at 1.485 odd being filled.
As usual. MMs facilitating a big boy in at a price no Joe blow would get for those huge volumes.
Interesting.
In terms of declaring and agreeing an "Allowable Loss". I believe you have 4 years following the fin year of the loss to register it. Once agreed you can use the loss offset in future fin years to increase the standard CGT allowance and avoid paying CGT on any gains.
My understanding is that for shares in a trading account. If the company actually dissolves then you can make a representation for an Allowable loss compared to your purchase price. Just as you would if you had sold the shares for a loss.
However. If the company shares become of negligible value. But the company has not rdisolved.you must first make representation of the "Negligible Value". Then if HMRC CGT department accept that. You can then apply for the standard Allowable Loss. But not before.....
Shares in an ISA can't qualify for either.
I would suggest to be careful assuming that if your ISA provider/broker ultimately decided to move worthless shares to you trading account. That you can use them to claim any sort of formal "allowable loss". They were originally purchased in an ISA, and the decision to move them is the brokers alone.
As far as the HMRC Capital Gains office will be concerned. I am pretty sure they would not be eligible to be recorded as a usable Capital loss.
Thanks @Hippo, for the detail on a public auction.
So, on the assumption then that the auction reserve (set by the administrators) is the owed debt, say +-50m.
The left overs come down, as with all auctions. To if there is competition for the resource. If there is then extra monies accure. If there isn't it's sold for the debt one assumes.
I was simply trying to cut through as well for public info on who that extra monies may go too ( if that's the result). As of course there has been this ongoing view from certain individuals that we (RMM), by defaulting have forfeited the whole resourse.
As a non legal type (I am a technical guy by trade), it's not easy to see the truth from the ubiquitous trolls, as ever on this BB.
Cheers.
Yes. That seems logical to me.
But Smartpunter seems to repeatedly make the point that the resourse is now with the debtors. So just seeking to clarify?
Cheers.
@Smart
Genuine question. As this came up before and wasn't answered...
If Rambler owes (say) 50m, & the action is to sell. Let's say a couple of buyers recognise that the resourse is a good one and if run properly worth far far more.
If a mini bidding war happens and the sale realises 70m for arguments sake. Once the debtors have their 50m. Who owns the extra 20m?
Basically if it's the debtor's, as you imply that they now own the resourse - due to the defaults. Then why would they settle for only the 50m, if they may be able to get 70. This seems odd to me, unpalatable as it would still be for us of course.
If however they can only get back the debt they are owed. Then clearly if they won't wait and want the 50m. Then yeah, why sell it for 70, as they have no interest in us, the shareholders of RMM. So they won't press for more understand.
What's the legal situation, if you know?
Ta
@Monkey.
You enjoy revealing in others misfortune in real life too then I can only assume?
What a pleasant individual you come across as....
No idea if Moose is in any way related to you. But he seems more than bright enough to answer a few simple questions to clarify why he is posting here on his own.
I know you stated you get bored at weekends so continue to Troll bb's. So fill your boots mate. Some of us have a life and won't be reading your vitriol.
@Moose.
So clearly, you have strong knowledge of Canadian Mining process.
You joined LSE at the end of December, well into the financial foul up. Since then 31 posts. All on RMM ... Nothing to say on any other shares?
All not only telling us what we have sadly all found out.... The financial mismanagement. But also hammering it in that regardless., that indeed also the resourse isn't up to industrialising it. For all the reasons you point out repeatedly...
Kinda begs the question(s)....
A) So where were you a couple of years ago, to save us all the monies of investing then in something that you clearly see as having had no economic future ?
B) Why are you now using all that expertise banging away repeatedly here on this lemon though ... When you could be making money on viable plays elsewhere given your knowledge strikes one?
I am not disputing your very jaundice view now. As a large investor here I will be amazed if this isn't gone now from us the way it's been run. I try and be objective, as much as I would like it not to be so.
But... I do find the motives of some people here now, hard to fathom sometimes..... Or maybe it's not so difficult to under stand some of them, even at this stage....
Yes Fuku.
Agree it's looking dire now. I did read an interesting view elsewhere.
Basically the idea that NGen were a stalking horse, for unnamed loaners. That were basically looking to acquire the resource from some time back.
If the 5 Mill is more, but in from the same to secure... So from those still " interested" parties. That would make sense.
The resourse, at up to 2% Cu in a few years time. Will be a more than tidy sum, we all appreciate.
But likely now, for whomever requires/relaunches the company (Brad maybe, or AN Other?).
If they can take the mining advances, inject the capital, and run it professionally..... It will bring to a great earner IMO, and not just mine....
But existing holders look like toast sadly.
Big F*cks Small it seems?
What a shambles.
I found this looking up CCAA.
Not saying it's definitive by any means. But this hardly reads like the best time ever??
"Holders of common stock are typically last on the list. Quite often in CCAA proceedings, they get back none of the money they invested. Their old shares become worthless and often new shares are issued in the restructured company"......
With Iweb, which is Halifax @Free.
As said. Never had to use (in modern times) on main market, anything other than the standard online system to get prices.
Assume you are saying phone em and try and agree a deal for larger amounts? Good advice if it works for AIM PIs I guess.
Fair enough Bertie.
Not sure how many more times I can say that I will vote all my shares against this management if it ever comes to it. But there it is.
As to not lifting a finger. I think in my way over the last 3 odd years invested here. I have fought a few battles on this BB with both Uber rampers and derampers. People clearly looking to trade on others misfortune and influence sells or buys from them according to the traders current book position.
If you haven't seen that, then fine. But I have tried in a limited way here fyi.
Anyhow. We are on the same side. We think something is fishery here. As said, I assume that an RNS must come directly to explain their next steps. Let's see if that's been influenced by, as you say, the work you guys have put in?
Cheers.
Hi @Free.
Not a problem I guess. Just a mental (re)note to self, that may also strike a chord with AIM newbies.
So, having traded on the main market for years, where even if you build up fairly large holdings liquidity to sell is always there as a PI. I personally have found AIM a bit wild west. As discussed with Wasa those X2 reported large sells were I assume pre organised between some II types. As if I had wanted to sell my holding.....Not that I do just yet.
Shifting that (375k) in a single shot - which is only a bit more than the smaller of those two biggies yesterday. Would have obviously gone NT on my usual digital platform, and I certainly wouldn't have the got a price near 1.50 flat, when small sells were getting 1.51 at the time.
Clearly that's not how these two transactions were done. In my limited experience of AIM. The only time I could shift any great volume electronically was with GGP. My first time in water here in 2019. Having built a fairly large volume of shares that year in the very low pennies. The MMs would let me sell big chunks on line offering strong prices directly. But of course that was due to the heard arriving, and the frenzy buying during 2020. FOMO etc. Indeed in the last days of 2020 I was getting offered 37.6p for 1M shares straight up. No NT.... If people know that share that's bang on the AtH and at the top spike.... Not that anyone knew that at the time of course....
Most all other AIM shares liquidity, on my electronic platform at least, has been much lower of course.
Hence when I do down the line wish to sell any volume here. I am looking as said at doing it into a rising market. Where hopefully we are doing a "GGP" circa 2020 :-)
Cheers.
So basically Wasa.
You are saying that there is a rule for large IIs, and another for PI trades. Agree, point I was making.
I think you are right of course.
It will be interesting what we get offered, when the spread is (hypothetically).... 1.5 to 1.52p to sell.... Say 500k shares later on.... Yeah I know we assume far higher, but let's extrapolate.
I suspect a lot less that the current 1.501p for Joe Public ....
Interesting to look to the future, when the big players here (relatively, PI wise). Look to off load.
Best IMO to sell then in to a very much rising market, given how it roles....rather than a stable one....
@Rover.
What's that at 1.5 quid a share... about £1.4 Mill?
The price says a Sell.... Generally that's correct, anything under 1.501 regardless of the spread tbf.
But I am always amazed, that all day I can test sell 1k shares at 1.51. But according to this the MMs will allow someone to flog shares equal to £1.4M quid at a flat 1.5.....emmmm
Something odd, or rotten in the state of AIM....?
@ant.
You do always make me smile mate. I admire to a degree what that forum is trying to do of course, and I, like I think I saw you. Will apply our holdings votes to that cause if it seems sensible or ever becomes relevant for sure.
But yeah. Two legs bad, Four legs good. All animals created equal, maybe some more equal than others. You have to be careful as George well knew. The top brass there were interested yesterday in my holding and support for sure. But when that Twunt had a go about a simple post I made regarding PI influence.... Which seems very relevant to the influence that can be exercised.... Surely...
Because he is also clearly a RIG member...... Hardly a murmur.... Interesting I thought.
Regards.
@Mad8.
Thank you for the info on the 20% known shares in PI hands. That's the kind of information my (I thought) pretty innocent post first thing this morning was looking to gleen.
So as to be completely clear & as you requested it again. I hold 620k in an ISA. My wife 275k in an ISA and 30k in her trading account. Total 925k, approx 0.57% of the declared 162M shares, to my knowledge.
If it comes to voting against actions that are not beneficial to honest share holders. I would vote all of these of course.
Regards.
As said Santi/1nvst.
You can count in my shares, even though I have no interest in another forum. I can't be more explicit. My simple query early today was to gauge the relative share split. Not anything that seemed to me to be controversial.
However, there are, as Fuku says ... Nobs everywhere. So rather than further engage with people looking to stir it up. Will go.