Member Info for Toffers

Https://www.miningweekly.com/print-version/renergen-successfully-producing-liquid-helium-at-virginia-project-2024-05-06

Riflemans, you have to be invested to make a profit to bank, which clearly you are not!

Got the extra 300,000 now at 0.725. GLA

It's been NT for 5 mins! Got some, but not the second lot I was going to go for at 0.69!

For another top up. GLA.

FWIW I topped up some more today!

And CP admitted he didn't have the evidence! See his post earlier on.

Actually strop I'm not, as they haven't written in black and white something that could be construed as to portray the company as deceitful. Therefore, the statement, which only CP made, is defamatory, as it implies that the company/LB have divulged price sensitive information in contravention of Rule 11 of the AIM Rules, and therefore, by posting the exact wording that CP did, he is implying that the Company have misled investors, which = deceit, and to accuse someone of deceit without evidence to back up such a statement, is defamatory imo.

I've reported it to the company, explaining it's potentially libellous, and that perhaps they would wish to seek to have the references made by CP to it removed from the site. Hopefully it will be, as it doesn't help one jot having stuff like that posted here.

Claiming CP and actually providing evidence are two different things. You have claimed price sensitive information was given, but you have no proof to back it up. End of.

"if it is true" rather

" if that is true" - you've already said price sensitive information was given. You clearly have no evidence so just leave it at that, but own it, and move on from it. Until you have written evidence, in the form of a witness statement from someone who was present, and it was clearly said behind closed doors and other investors have not been made aware of the same, then you haven't a leg to stand on. End of.

You cannot make a libellous statement based simply on hearsay! Heavens sake.

Itis libellous CP because you've made it a statement, and now you are saying you have no proof to back it up, which is what I thought. I've reported it. Let's hope it gets removed, for your sake.

And Pompey, I've posted links this morning in my quest to help maintain positivity about helium and it's production in Tanzania. What have you provided exactly?

Retract

Upi are now trying to twist it CP. You said that placing investors had been given price sensitive information, that's quite a statement to make, and you clearly have no proof to back it up, and now you're saying it isn't to do with that, but it's unknown what their current cash position is, but that's the same with all companies, what they spend day to day etc aren't decisions that shareholders are involved in, that's the Board's responsibility to have checks and balances in place. You can roughly calculate from what they have raised, and what they have said they are going to spend that money on, and the previous set of accounts, that is all, but there is nothing there that is price sensitive information. Get a grip. You really ought to detract that statement that you made about price sensitive information as you have nothing to back it up with, and potentially, it's libelous.

It's out there that they have pocketed over $12 million, I've just posted the FT page for He1, and you can see what they've raised this year, it's clear for all to see. That's not price sensitive.

Https://markets.ft.com/data/equities/tearsheet/summary?s=HE1:LSE

CP, there's a difference between someone saying they have $12.8m free cash and you stating that placing investors are being given price sensitive information. As I said, where is your proof? I'm sure we would all like to know.

Where's your proof that they have actually been given price sensitive information? if they have actually been given that as you state, then you need to take it up with the Nomad and FCA. They might well have been given information on prospects in a bit more detail, but what is the price sensitive information you refer to CP?