Member Info for taufour

Another thing about that remarkably complicated recent blog of BBN's ... he casually uses the phrase "aspirational guidance" as though it were just another thing ... a slightly regrettable thing perhaps, but definitely a thing.

As the word "aspirational" has such positive connotations, the phrase "aspirational guidance" sounds like something not totally bad, but only slightly naughty.

Actually, the phrase is somewhere between self-contradictory and meaningless.

It's not as if there are several kind of guidance, one of which is aspirational.

"Aspirational guidance" is not guidance at all.

Fortune should not have been allowed to get away with such an incoherent excuse for a truly shocking volte face

May 14th (Q1 operational update) "2021 Group guidance expected towards the lower end of 4,100 mtV and 4,350 mtV"

June 29th (annual report) "2021 Group full-year production guidance has been revised to between 3,400 mtV and 3,600 mtV"

Attributing this to a change of guidance policy, from aspirational to whatever, is not acceptable. And if BBN wants to re-use the phrase, I think he should at least put it in quotes.

BBN's tweet is shockingly complicated.

Until now I'd had no idea that the investability of BMN depends on such complex and finely balanced calculations. I had thought it was mainly a question of hoping they'd got reliable mining kit, and there wouldn't be too many strikes, and the vanadium price would hover around $40k.

And then BBN goes and says "DYOR and always check everything yourself"

Cripes. Doing that for BBN's tweet would be totally beyond my capability. Am seriously thinking about whether BMN is an appropriate stock for me.

Oops, something similar has gone wrong again. This time they have put an alert on the page:

"Market Data is not currently available on the site. We are investigating a technical issue on www.londonstockexchange.com. Market data is not displaying as expected . Other services across the Group, including London Stock Exchange and RNS are unaffected and continue to operate as normal."

I've noticed quite a few complaints about high-vis posters, or people with high-vis blogs, who mention a share while they are buying it, but do not mention it while they are selling it, but then a few weeks later mention that they already sold.

I am genuinely unsure what is the right thing for them to do and would appreciate discussion.

Because, I feel fairly sure that such people indeed *should not* mention a share while they are selling it.

But does it then follow that, to be consistent, they should also not mention a share while they are buying it? That would pretty much close down a lot of the discussion, which would be a pity.

Not sure what to think.

Hi Jimbo, "Looks like your xlon scripts are playing up" Oops. Sorry

"or maybe it's the Lon Stock Exch." The Stock Exchange's public-facing trade data feed stopped working for several stocks yesterday (no idea why), now seem to be OK

'gracious' ~ unusual word to have in an RNS

nice

"I am fairly sure Alfa said for the next year it would have cost £700 to run and he also mentioned keeping it going if others wanted to contribute to the running cost."

Hi. That £700 pa number is a bit of a shocker. Are you sure there isn't an extra zero there? £70 pa would be reasonable. (Actually I think it could be done for free, except for the domain name at $10 pa, but I won't go there now.)

Normally this wouldn't be any of our concern but if there is an invitation to forum members to contribute to the cost then it is.

Here is one possible suggestion for how it could have cost so much, which is if TBP doesn't actually own the design of its website. It is (was) an unusually well designed site, and one can well believe that it might have been done by a professional web design company ... who could retain ownership and license the design for whatever astronomical figure they can get away with.

If that is the reason why it cost so much then I think alfacomp was quite right to put his foot down.

But that leaves us with the challenge of what to do next.

Thank you Lionel for very thoughtful commentary.

If there is any discussion (maybe on telegram group? i don't have access to that) of what might be done to mitigate the loss of the perspective website the following link to the web archived version of Lionel's big picture might be handy

http://web.archive.org/web/20210111074541/https://www.thebushveldperspective.com:443/blog/public-articles-1/post/lionels-big-picture-428

Hi Halespur, "Alfa has taken the site offline as it has served its purpose", thanks for yr reply but I gotta say I find it quite incomprehensible ... how can that excellent site possibly be said to have "served its purpose"?

Granted, I don't have any particular understanding of what its purpose was in the first place, but putting that aside, it seems mind-boggling to say that its purpose (whatever it was) has now been served.

Could I ask Lionel (big picture) and Loudspeaker (vanadium price commentary) if they would like to comment.

According to https://www.isitdownrightnow.com/thebushveldperspective.com.html the bushveld perspective blog has been down all day.

"It is not just you. The server is not responding..."

Hi Jessielee, "Think the 915000 are buys" ... but why? They look like quite normal sells.

There were a couple of trades today which looked like they could conceivably be either buy or sell,
08-Sep-21 13:16:08 5.125 300,000
08-Sep-21 13:22:52 5.125 300,000
but the ones which you mentioned were obviously sells ... weren't they?

Bit of a beginner here, puzzled at how some of the information sources fit together.

There seems to be much more information in the two posts today quoting H&P than in yesterday's RNS. Is there a more detailed version of the RNS somewhere?

FreeTheCat yes you are right, it is even listed at https://www.londonstockexchange.com/stock/HZM/horizonte-minerals-plc/company-page as denominated in CAD

2021-09-01 19:01:41 (CAD) 0.135 500 67.50 Off-Book XOFF N ECEU

Is it an optical illusion or does the entire management team at https://investors.gevo.com/corporate/management/ have blue eyes?

I think it's someone in for 500k, the two trades for 250k shares were one cancelling the other

2021-08-31 15:06:58.217 15:23:45 (GBX) 7.5 500,000 37,500.0 Off-Book AIMX P+LRGS AIMX
2021-08-31 15:06:58.217 --:--:-- (GBX) 7.45 250,000 18,625.0 Off-Book AIMX P AIMX (x2)
2021-08-31 15:06:58.217 --:--:-- (GBX) 7.45 250,000 18,625.0 Off-Book AIMX CANC+P AIMX

Still nice tho

Hi John, "not a steal a decent profit, though people like to dream of being millionaires overnight."

I think you might be commenting without having adequate appreciation of the nuances of the situation.

It only looks like a reasonable premium, and it only looks like Ganfeng are playing by the golf-club-approved rules, because the BCN share price has been low since 2018.

As to why the BCN share price has been low since 2018 - that would be an interesting discussion, and it is there that any insights relevant to HZM could be sought.

Suffice it to say for now that the BCN resource is really world class and is 100 miles from US border with rail links but they failed to counter a sustained myth that clay mines could never yield good lithium.

" ...But to keep selling down at 5.6p is like durrrr."

It may be the case that people selling at today's price are like durrrr ...

but bear in mind this means that people buying at today's price are like whatever the opposite of durrrr is

"The 4 trades between 13.16.17 & 13.24.26 are all buys not sells"

Yep. It's a mystery that the standard websites persist with their "below midpoint = sell" fiction when a little bit of pattern matching makes things so much clearer.
http://luku.org/xi/BMN/mtwp98tb/

"Anyone seen this. I know it is Lithium, but interesting nevertheless..."

Hi Hazbeen. It is very relevant for this forum, not only for the obvious reasons but also because JM is non-exec chairman of Zinnwald.

But I do have to comment that, judging by your note, you do not seem to be aware that Ganfeng's probably successful offer for Bacanora is at a stupendously low value, even though today they found a way of filling in the small print to make the offer 10% better than it had appeared.

Ganfeng over the last few years have completely outwitted the BCN management (not the ZNWD management fortunately).

I don't understand part of that PDMR RNS - where it seems to say that Lyndon Williams sold his entire holding of 122,480 shares leaving him with zero shares.

How can that be "in order to, in part, settle the tax obligations associated with the issue of these shares"?