Member Info for Urbanracer

Perhaps a pertinent point in time to hear afresh from Bernard…..

Every trade today is a buy folks. All just below the mid so showing as sells.

…….and in English please?

And I realise that I have made exactly the same header error on my last post so now I have to apologise.

Go and eat some sushi yer pollock!

Yer not a bad lad Daz😂 I know you enjoy the crack.

Think it had just got a smidge out of hand of late.

Cheers Daz,

I certainly had not seen that posted anywhere. 👍

Now then Redtrade,

Quite enjoy the current Prem (I finally looked it up) versus Kod tennis match. Quite why this particular game is being played is beyond me; checks to see correlation between sells on one and similar value buys on the other has proved inconclusive.

What I would, however, say with conviction is this. Never ever trust a poster who fails to write simple English correctly. I refer to your phrase ‘and the market could of changed….’

“Would Of” or “Would Have”?

The correct spelling is would have, not would of. This mistake is common among English speakers because the contracted version of would have (would’ve) sounds similar to would of when pronounced aloud.

I would have helped, but I didn’t know you were struggling.

I would’ve helped, but I didn’t know you were struggling.

NOT

I would of helped, but I didn’t know you were struggling.

I bet you are one of these idiots who asks if he can ‘get’ a cup of coffee rather than ‘have!’

Think on.

Ps. If you think I am being a *ic*, you would be right. I am just trying to fit in with the current idiocy on here.

Hang on Bline,

Merc may have put a bit of timber on recently, but calling him massive is a bit unnecessary.

Balboa,

No one has been ‘let down’ by BA.

If you are not happy, go and play somewhere else.

Buys showing as sells again btw. (Two of mine in last 20 mins showing in red)

Also, I am day off and just watched a film called High Noon, or was it Hai Nan??

Anyway it’s a sign by anyone’s standards!!

Stirring music sounds……

“It was quiet;………..

Also don’t forget

………………. with further assays pending for the Bougouni South, Boumou and Ngoualana prospects. These final results are keenly awaited as geological logging of drillholes has highlighted the presences of wide pegmatite zones.

Thanks for the responses chaps.

Morning Daz,

I have been checking the repository quite regularly and the last sync. date is still showing as 4 April. Our amendment application has never featured, and , unless it is being worked on by authorities and will show after next sync., there are only two options surely? Firstly it has not yet been submitted or secondly that as an amendment (to licence) application, it will not appear on the repository as an application even though it is in the system.

I am trying to wade through the many (some are rather rude aren’t they!?) posts of the past few days but I take it the consensus is that should the back stop be reset, then it is the amendment to licence application that is the hiccup, rather than any other administrative issue?

Excellent work Daz,

Good to see on two points. Firstly the promptness of the Kod reply is to be commended. Secondly the content of the response is very reassuring albeit it has to spell out the obvious caveats.

Much appreciated Daz.

Of course. It’s just that Aim rule 11 seems so subjective to me; a bit of a grey area sometimes.

Hope you get a good response Daz 👍👍

It rather depends on what you have said or asked about Daz……

Jeeeeesus Merc,

Some graft has gone into that. Kudos.

My view is this.

Firstly, I don’t agree with this ‘missed deadline’ thing. It seems to me that CEO’s are damned if they do give indicative deadlines, and damned if they don’t. (The old ‘bad comms’ theories). As such, I always treat such matter as estimates.

Secondly, and all that said, the fact is that they did not meet the first long stop. They confirmed this by RNS as soon as it was clear to them that they could not keep the schedule. The fact, however, that they decided to set a second (risk?), AND also set a date so close to the first, suggests to me that they are certain they will keep to it. That they ‘missed’ the first long stop is not at all unexpected in my opinion and should not warrant undue criticism, whereas, if they miss the next having chosen to give so narrow an extension (when not being forced to do so) then they would look rather unprofessional. And we know BA is anything but.

And finally, I must admit to being rather puzzled over the Malian side of things. I must admit that, contrary to Lavs views, I did think we needed confirmation of the dms amendment to licence approval. As such, and with only two weeks to the new long stop, Lavs view of things seems to make sense.

Suspect we will soon know one way or t’other.