Member Info for thetriplestar

They been working at Raglan last few weeks getting gold so given that he reiterates that Raglan will be paying the bills in this interview > I am comfortable so far so very good there at Raglan - expecting great news from there soon

This RNS is the "Starting Gun." The "Savvy Financial Leaders" who funded at 0.33p now have the Official Narrative to support a move back toward 1p and beyond. It is the company's way of saying: "The science is real, the patents are real, and now the US Government has made us a priority."

For those who called ECR "uninvestable" this morning >> you are now officially arguing against a professional analyst who sees 145% upside.

Dr. Long is not just looking at the gold in the ground; he is looking at Cash Flow. The report highlights that ECR is transitioning from a "money-burning explorer" to a "self-funding producer." At c£9m, Oak believes the company is valued like a single-asset explorer, but it is now a 10-project operator.

The report clarifies the timeline for the four major production hubs:

Raglan (Alluvial): Commercial production (meaning actual gold sales) is expected in the next 1-2 months.

Maddens Flat (Hard Rock): Production expected in 3-6 months after the A$1M decline extension is finished.

Blue Mountain (Alluvial): Development starting in Q3 2026.

Salt Bush (Vat Leach): Targeted for Q2-Q3 2027.

The report also explicitly mentions funding:

Existing Cash: ECR's £1.5M raise in January and the £0.75M from October 2025 provide the necessary runway to reach the "Gold Sale" phase without needing another equity raise.

Self-Sustaining: Oak Securities maintains the thesis that once Raglan sales start, the revenue will fund the exploration at the larger "discovery" projects like Lolworth and Tambo.

The RNS highlights that SVN-002 is being advanced via the 505(b)(2) pathway.

The Fact: This is the "Shortcut" pathway. It allows Solvonis to use existing safety data from esketamine (Spravato) to speed up their own approval.

The Synergy: Combined with Trump’s Executive Order to "accelerate innovative research models," this 505(b)(2) path just became a "Super-Express Lane."

While the RNS doesn't name the "42-day" window (that would be too aggressive for an RNS), it explicitly mentions "Review prioritisation" and "Rescheduling review."

The Signal: Solvonis is positioning its SVN-015 (NIDA-funded) and SVN-002 (US-focused) programs as the primary beneficiaries of this "prioritisation."

The Verification: By mentioning the NIDA Addiction Treatment Discovery Program (ATDP) again, AT is reminding the market that the U.S. Government is already funding the safety studies for SVN-015. They aren't just "pursuing" grants; they are embedded in the federal system.

The RNS mentions "Capital-markets plans" and "Capital-markets arena" three separate times.

This is a clear signal and the most formal "nod" yet that the LSE is just a temporary parking lot. Solvonis is telling the market: "The U.S. is the most attractive capital-markets environment... and we are monitoring our plans accordingly." * The Math: AT is telling institutional investors that the current £19M LSE valuation is a "geographic glitch." He is preparing the ground for the Nasdaq Re-rate.

I would have thought that would come out in the PnL > Sales > Helium ~ Grade / Quantity / Unit Price

It can start to feel like shareholders are being treated as a permanent funding source without clear accountability.

We’ve seen repeated equity raises at low prices, a share count now around ~10bn, and over $2m a year going to senior management and the board — all while the company is still pre-revenue and progressing slowly.

At the same time, licences have been relinquished and are now reappearing in other vehicles with overlapping founders and cleaner structures. Even if that’s standard industry practice, it raises a fair question about who ultimately captures the upside.

No issue with funding a project — that’s part of the journey — but shareholders are entitled to ask whether capital is being raised and deployed in a way that maximises their long-term value, not just sustains the structure.

Constant dilution at low prices — who’s really capturing the upside here?

Our leadership team are treating the shareholders like an ATM that doesn't require a receipt….

Any insight in to what price they sold it for? I’m keen to learn prices in today’s market from real on the ground sales like this.

If their 2026 modeling shows that the 9.2% helium isn't just trapped in a small "pocket" at Itumbula but is part of a regional "charge" that extends toward Tai, the volume of gas becomes "Tier-1" scale.

A partner doesn't want to buy into a "test site"; they want to buy into a Development Hub. By refocusing on this area, HE1 is presenting a "Low-Risk Appraisal" play rather than a "High-Risk Exploration" play.

The failure to set the ESP below 1,061m and the inability to isolate the basement at 840m were mechanical defeats, not geological ones.

• The Insight: The "ledges" suggest that the basement fault zone is highly fractured and perhaps more "rubbly" than anticipated. While this made the 2026 test messy, it confirms a massive, connected fracture network.

• The Pivot: If their new modeling shows that the dilution was coming from a specific, identifiable leak in the casing or a "thief zone" in the lower Karoo, a Farm-in partner wouldn't see a "bad well"—they’d see a well that needs a better completion design. A "Major" with deep pockets for specialized liner hangers and swelling packers can fix a mechanical leak easily.

Check out the comments on their Linkedin post -

An article worth reading -

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/heliumsupply-tanzania-usa-share-7450534939051282433-Sz8-/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android&rcm=ACoAAFoKt_0BoqeftZRQwe02mG3NX-lv22es6Vc

The argument that management only profits "if the share price goes up" ignores the fundamental gap between a Board’s risk and a Shareholder’s reality. While the 1p options are currently "underwater," the Board’s cost to hold them is zero—they are playing with "house money" provided by the very dilution that crushed the LTHs. For a Director, a move from 0.6p to 2p is a 300% gain on a zero-cost basis, resulting in a million-pound payday. For the LTH who funded this journey at 5p or 10p, that same move is still a catastrophic loss.

Suggesting that a management "windfall" is secondary to a rising share price is a dangerous distraction. A rising share price is only a "win" if it exceeds your cost of entry; otherwise, it’s just a slightly smaller loss. By re-pricing their incentives at the bottom of the cycle, the Board has ensured they get a "Winner's Medal" for a performance that still leaves their primary investors in the recovery room. We aren't "trolling"—we are doing the math that the Board hopes we’ll ignore while they wait for the Qatari supply crisis to do the work their drilling program hasn't.

The board is currently acting more like Asset Managers than Explorers. They used our money to buy a 50% seat at Blue Star’s table so they could point at 'Production' without having to do the hard work of drilling in Tanzania themselves.

While they wait for a 'Big Boy' partner to pay for the next Rukwa well, they are drawing six-figure salaries and awarding themselves millions of free shares. They have turned Helium One into a 'Holding Company' that lives off shareholder raises while waiting for a miracle in the global helium market.

Today’s RNS confirms a brutal reality: the Board has built a private fortune at a share price that leaves most LTHs in the red. By granting themselves 94.4 million free shares and holding 115 million options at 1p, the Directors have effectively "re-priced" their own success. While a 1p price target represents a 90% loss for anyone who bought at 10p, for the CEO, those 27.5 million nil-cost shares represent £275,000 in pure profit.

At a 2p exit, the top Directors would net over £2.5 million in total profit, achieving millionaire status even if they never deliver the "Tanzanian Giant" and only manage small-scale production in Colorado. They have essentially hedged against their own failure; while they are "locked in" until 2029, their zero-cost entry insulates them from the massive dilution shareholders have suffered. They are playing a Retention Game, ensuring life-changing payouts for a mediocre outcome that doesn't even get retail investors back to break-even. Their "skin in the game" didn't cost them a penny, but it’s the shareholders who are left holding the bag.

Given the March Qatar strikes, the value of HE1’s data has tripled since February. LB likely has interest, but she is using this article to drive up the price. By framing HE1 as the "safe alternative to Ras Laffan," she is telling the current bidders: "Don't low-ball me; the whole world is watching this asset now."