Member Info for Teacup64

Has anybody ever asked themselves why I have never once picked on the shrinking MC, the falling SP, or any other typical deramper comments?...when to be fair, I could have. But instead, everything I have ever argued has gravitated specifically around APs percentage cut... Perhaps you all need to stop fooling yourselves about what you think my agenda is, and admit that you don't actually know what you it is.

BillB - I agree completely with that. I will honour that myself, but the food that I enjoy most is: a) Any statement that promotes BP as being profitable without the need for further drilling. b) Any statement where AP, or AP Groups benefits of BP, Blueberry or Zagra are involved. Stay away from those topics, and I will have no reason to defend my brothers interests.

TBTT - What...your speculation, or lack of evidence to backup your claim of "Big data"?

BillB - Seeds of doubt, or a logical, non risk approach to shareholders.....stop chasing the spike for a quick buck!

TBTT - That is not evidence! My evidence is backed up by APs word, yours is on optimism that previous grades will predict the future grades.

Mullaney - Hi, I have no investment in Vast myself. However, my brother does, and I will fight a corner of his, no matter how militantly, if it means saving his investment from being drained of its lifeblood, from what I consider propogation of messages promoting mindless spending that could potentially end catastrophically. Will I buy myself? ...if financial stability is achieved, then yes. But definetly not if BP goes untested. Perhaps I may dip in for Diamonds or Zagra, but not for very long if a relatively unmeasured BP is the target. In the meantime, it's my brothers investment, and protection of, that I will make clear if a potential threat is possed.

TBTT - How big is the BP license area, and where have the production samples been taken from? Unless you can answer that, then we HAVE to rely on the trustworthyness of APs statement in the RNS, and the Russian measurement system. Please, before calling it ******, in an attempt to derail my logical and factual motion, please provide anything that relates to your evidence of "The dataset at Baita Plai is huge".

Pepco - I agree completely, it would be cheaper that way around. But here's a worse case scenario... Let's say we save money by not fully testing and go straight into production, and legal obligations are imposed upon us by a financial institution that funds the project. What if the bigger license area doesn't perform inline with the 6% or 1.8mt as expected from the Russian standards? Again, AP Group taking a 20% cut of the project also further increases the risk of failure to Vast...if Vast had that extra 20% instead, it could somewhat offset any resource expectation dampeners...so that's an added risk, ontop of the BP gamble...if you know what I mean.

BP could be profitable, AP has mentioned that himself, the RNS has referred to 1.8mt at a 6% copper equivalent....so he right to say that it's profitable based on those figures. If you read the RNS in question, he states that the figures are derived from Russian standards(Reserve & Resource Reporting System). He states that BP is only classed as a resource. Now if you look into the Russian standardisation system, you will find that BP is not considered a category A, B, C1, or C2 reserve, but either a CP1, P2, or P3 resource instead. If you dig a little deeper, you will find that BP fits nicely into the Prognostic 1 Category(P1). P1 resources are calculated using as little as one drill core, any data such as the old production results which were taken from an isolated area of the mine within our license area, and any surrounding structures. In BPs case, it's ~50km from the Rosia Montana mine. If 1.8mt @ 6% copper equivalent is derived from such a potentially small dataset, then the BP project could in reality be a massive hole, or a jackpot. Before funnelling all our funds towards BP, and taking on debt financing, I think shareholders need to know what exactly they are getting into first before committing ourselves.

That'll be the bottle of red that causes CB to forget to press the send button, lol ;)

Looking at what should be Casts top, and first priority, financially stabilising the company. Doesn't it worry you in the slightest that BP might not be quite as you actually expected? Funneling what little cash we have, and tying the company to legal obligations via a third party funding package....what if BP fails, we would then have two cash burning operations with debt. It's all good promoting BP at 6% and 1.8mt, but there is no concrete guarantee as a result of loose extrapolation of numbers and data. Fair enough, I understand the optimism, but risking corporate capital and debt financing on BP, when its effectively a gamble, seems potentially disastrous, and certainly isn't a solution to put straight the companies finances. I can understand if people may want to do it, just to sell on a quick rise perhaps, but Vast can be much bigger than that, and taking such big risks without proper measurement is asking for trouble....remember what everyone got like when we had no choice but to dilute and then resort to Bergen?....let's not walk down that path again folks, let's test the resource further before committing to debt.

Cyber - There goes my prediction. Next up, 2:32

And now 8th on the Leaderboard...how many days in a row is that?

Target 1 just inches away, and still no RNS ;)

Today @ 12:26

Target 1) Only 10-15% to break even! Target 2) A further 200% to recoup all losses incurred by XTR from about 3yrs ago. Target 3) Anymore of a raise and CB may actually deserve a public apology from me, which I can now unfortunately see happening...Awkward! ;)

For anyone's stress levels that just hit the roof reading that....I was playing about.

Pssttt, Campbell, over here, it's Andrew, behind the curtains.... Tell 'em what's happening in Zimbabwe would you, but I wasn't here ok!

Good things.

Let's see how much Chinese abuse the workers can tolerate before civil war breaks out!