Member Info for wasarunner

Chris - you're still worried about whether it's producing gold (or not) and how much. It's really not the thing to worry about. The thing to worry about is that 26% shareholder is now at war with around 20% shareholder for control of an (insolvent) company. Whoever wins that fight will mean PIs will get 0. That's independent of whether or not it can produce any gold profitably because time's up - it isn't producing now, it has the debt now, and the large lady is singing. You're focusing on what's going on on below the ground but above the ground it's a war. PIs are collateral damage in war.

The day it unsuspended. £500k. I owned 1% of the company at one point (at around the £50m mcap level). There's bad luck 'gold grades weren't as expected' then there's what happened at GRL, which was a different thing. I bought into the 2020+ 'this is a debt free gold explorer-turning producer with no debt and loads of reserves' story. I was invited into the relist placing incidentally and went - nah - this is going down. It turns out I was right. It did.

Well, it's a mess. What I don't understand (well, I understand why traders do it) is why people get shouted down when putting reasoned arguments to the downside. Especially when the facts are in plain sight. Mr Geezer was upvoted hundreds of times when he came with the 'list and trew are the dogs dangly bits' analogy and will make this successful. Yet it hasn't been successful and it turns out none of them get on - which was a fact hiding in plain sight when the former chairman was replaced. The reality was, and remains, that over the years this has either been mismanaged by incompetence, or worse. Latterly, I've come to the conclusion it's probably some of both but more of the latter. The mistake reasoned investors (like Chris) make in my opinion is they assume 2 things: 1. that any information the company actually announces is fact and therefore should be true (when, mainfestly, it can and often is not the case, and no the nomad, fca, etc etc do not protect you here) and 2. any of these people with the power are even remotely interested, or acting in your interests. Fidicuary duty my a**e, they're acting in their own best interests 100% if the time. And that rarely aligns with your interests as a PI.

It was a car crash and it was happening for years and the 'it will be different next time' story just stopped washing. People who came onto this board with any warning were shouted down, usually by the pumpsters who took their quick win and departed stage left. Deal of the century at 1p it turned out not to be, as Mr Geezer once put.

It's sad, but it is what it is. Greed. I lost a metric load of money on this company but at least I will be in peace knowing I was right to sell when I did, and that these were bad actors in an unregulated market. Maybe some of them don't win either, it's at least a hope. Looks like Nguvu+Paracle vs AIMSL+Priestley on the face of it. Who cares, they're all bound to be about as genuine as each other. The party that won't win, for sure, is the PI, IMHO. Sorry for holders and good luck.

Jack - wouldn't bother engaging with him/her. Pretty obviously who it is - starts off all naive polite but can't help himself/herself 'dear' and go play with your trains dear.

'Not the same company as 2021'. Damn right. Then: 50koz guidance, £50m mcap, virtually no debt, could raise equity (or debt), board still has credibility. Today, guidance: no guidance, debt a multiple of mcap, can't raise equity (or debt), bod have 0 credibility. How do you raise equity or debt 4 months out from $7m being due with the last major creditor departed with a big haircut :) And yet raise they must because there's no way it's covering cost let alone the interest.

I'm more and more of the opinion of the other poster(s) who think this has been deliberate. If Emma were trying, but not succeeding, she'd be posting something about it somewhere, RNS, company website, anything. "we tried x, but we got y". She's not trying - why not? What's going to happen next? For my money some major corporate restructuring along with the gold loan. What happens to current equity? Who knows.

But.....I could be wrong and there could be a huuuuge gold pour just around the corner big enough to pay AIMSL back with interest. That's what some old geezer thinks might happen ;)

I did my own research by looking at the 5 year share price graph, and reading back through the RNS's. which is what any institutional investor will do before they put any money in here. You can call me a basher but I'm pointing out basic facts. You may believe it will be different this time and you may be right. But historically this company hasn't delivered, even as far back as 6 months ago the now infamous '1000 oz/mth' quote which even has the current crop of investors rattled because it's blatantly a lie. We'll see. I'll shutup but in my opinion you'll see a placing before any upturn. Hopefully they can get it capitalised properly but it probably suits AIMS to bleed it so who knows.

Yes I agree - the elephant in the room (IMO) is that AIMS has a huge position and holds all the cards. They definitely won't lose there are very few scenarios (if there is literally any way to mine gold profitably at the mine) that they lose. But there are scenarios where they win and you lose and that's the worrying scenario IMO. Bluegold through that was not worth hanging around for. If the other 'big' investors all sell out that bodes badly and also it's super hard then to attract other 'institutional' investment. And it's not PIs financing Goldstone there has been no public raise. It's a tough situation for the company but kind of one of their making because there have been years and years now to make this work when it was much easier to attract investment. Even the gold price as is often mentioned here is currently massively in their favour!

IMO they did it so they could declare 'the seller isn't me'. No idea why, just like I have no idea why Paracle (who I believe are the sellers) are selling. Also Paracle have been there a long time selling now may have nothing to do with Goldstone's situation though you'd expect if Goldstone were indeed about to turn the corner, as many on this board believe, then they wouldn't be selling.

But unfortunately for buyers that's what hammered the price when it rose briefly from time to time as Goldstone announced something. Relentless selling. You wouldn't blame the company not to put out any good news against that backdrop because it just gets sold anyway. Time will tell. I don't like how opaque AIM is, it's a far from transparent market.

This is weighed down by the fact that it can't produce enough gold to keep the lights on and investment is really hard to come by when you've just screwed your last investors (bluegold) who walk away with a big loss. And the enormous burden of debt the company is under. How do you attract investment (equity?) when AIMS will convert another huge tranche of accrued debt to shares? The equity is immediately worth less than you paid for it. And if you put in debt - well - it didn't work well for bluegold as it wasn't secured.

Obvious Paracle are selling by the way, that, (and only that) is what the token buy from AIMS told you because they bought a postage stamp worth of shares to indicate they hadn't reduced their position so they could re-declare it. Who else has the millions and millions of shares that have been dumped? Not an old mate of an old mate who happens to think crypto is a better investment. Now I have no idea why Paracle are selling it may not be anything to do with the fundamentals of Goldstone it could be any other reason but it's really really obvious it's them now. An outside chance of Nguvu. It will be interesting when Goldstone next have to re-publish the holding but if they aren't officially informed of the position then I guess they just update on current numbers. This is why AIM is so opaque - no need to tell you I'm out till I'm out.

FWIW I think a raise is coming to keep the lights on, there's just too little buying from interested parties. In some ways they should have completely recapitalised the company when it relisted, I do believe they tried (but failed) when they tried to raise the £1.9m or whatever was touted. It might have been a different story. But now it'll be a raise at a relatively low price.

This is all just IMHO just like everything positive Chris puts across is in his/hers IMHO. Because nobody really knows. GLA

Sure you haven't. And you've been a member of this forum since 11th June. Of course it is.

Notwithstanding I'll shut up, you guys ramp away, the results will be the results (it'll be a forward looking lie) and the game will continue. For the time being. GLA

My point there is, it's super risky to short a management team you think are great, in a current gold price environment no? There is actually (and I still believe this) a small chance of it working then the short isn't going to do so well? I wouldn't buy it, but I also certainly wouldn't short it.

Then you've identified you're not happy with the management team, but you haven't identified that that's literally the most important thing. A good management team can make the most of an average resource, a bad management team will screw over even a decent resource. I thought the resource was alright, perhaps not the best, but alright and could make money at half the current gold price. That it hasn't, tells you what you need to know (about the management team) in a gold environment at double the price.

ChaucerMan give it a break really? If Emma List and Trew make the best omelette since COrdon Bleu invented omelette, why were you (and I quote):

"04/06/25 Loving my short, closed at 0.48.Riding up 35% today."

"04/06/25 Way back clown. Shorted them from all the way down from 1.6p"

"04/06/25 On the fence now. Made 60% up, 200% down and 35% up.See how it goes now as direction unclear."

The period from 1.6p down included the period where I pointed out it wasn't going to work out which you refuted at every turn and told me to go an play with trains. While supposedly short. Oh I get it - that's not you! If it spells like a geezer grammar like a geezer ramps like a geezer - it's a geezer.

Methinks you talk from an artisanal shaft my friend.

I kind of feel like, having been invested, we bought our seat at the debate table, whatever happens here. I happen to think the same as Corrumpo, that it's being played, by who I don't know, and for the time being I'm giving Emma (but no others) the benefit of the doubt as I do believe she has been walking a tightrope for sure. But a £0.5m loss in my case buys me the ability to post my views here then so be it. My view is it won't end well. If it does, I'll congratulate the winners, even the geezer as long as obviously his stated position was his actual position.....

>>Thanks 801 - who cares?

Clearly geezer does, as he's back with the second alias in 2 days. Dude, some advice, unless your 'algo' as you stated on the other board is to be trivially identifiable across your many aliases use gpt to change your punctuation and spelling, and probably don't start your pump with 'Trew and LIst are skilled operators of the highest calibre and want your best interests' when a. it's what you said last time and b. that's obviously and manifestly untrue.

What's the position now, long? short? sitting on the fence? long and short? Or will you determine it in retrospect once you see the price action.

Chris - your position (invested, optimistic/wavering) is just as valid as mine (uninvested, pessimistic) and therefore both positions are worth posting. For what it's worth, they're probably honest appraisals, if opposed. People should be more concerned about the geezers who state a position while supposedly trading it the other way, though in the case of geezer, I think he might actually have confused his own trades.

Anyway, he'll be back with a third alias and shoot me down again :-) Also FWIW my posting history is there across all time because I'm not hiding behind anything, I once owned 5.5m shares in this clown outfit, and lost most of the lot. But if I'd waited for today I'd be down more than my exist position so that's something. GLA

>>Again? wasarunner/corrumpo are you the same person?

Not as far as I know. I happen to agree with a lot of what he says though. Maybe that makes us the same person in spirit. I know who I am, what I had invested here, what lies I was sold, and how much I lost. I'll watch from the wings the next (or final) chapters unfolding and if I was wrong, I'll come out and say so. Good luck with your investment.

>>It would have been private and Billy boy rubbing his chubby hands together.

This indeed is what my sources say. When I attempted to contact him back during suspension (or maybe the year before I forget) he was working on a deal to benefit all shareholders. Well in fact he was working on a deal to benefit himself.

That geezer thinks he's on site every week is quite funny. I was there on site all through May and didn't see him turn up once :).

Chris, again, I admire your optimisim and if any of the stated facts by the company could be taken at face value, I'd agree with you. But you have to look beneath the veneer. GLA

He's back. Just a different alias this time. Same spiel. Must be time for a long.

>>I think geezer has been claiming to have shorted from 1.5p on the advfn forums.

A hindsight trader then who pumps it on the forums then when it goes the opposite way to his pump says he was short all the way and made a killing. Makes sense. A joker then. He'll be here telling us he made at least a fiver on this stock soon.... it's the intensive defending of the indefensible I find laughable, an explanation for every nuance which paints it in a positive light. No uptdate from the company on production? It's because they don't need to - no mining company does that (does it occur to people that having stated a goal, the reason they are not updating relative to that goal is because they haven't achieved it? If they'd achieved it they'd be shouting it from the rooftops of course). How's the debt looking? We don't know and the results won't tell us. The forward looking statement will say 'continuing to progress this and progress that and expect to reach this target by chistmas'. It's all made up see....

Also wouldn't wait with bated breath for the TR1, or indeed, the company to announce material facts just because AIM rules state it has to announce material facts. The level of (non) compliance on AIM is actually staggering, with it being, essentially unregulated. Which brings me back to.....the nomad is paid by the company....

I pretty much agree with Corrumpo here. Whether they're rogues or not, perhaps, one thing they are not is aligned. That's obvious from the fact the main players didn't put into the raises since relist. Any of the three listed on the website (Paracle, Nguvu, AIMS) could be the sellers, AIMS can afford to sell a few they earnt out of interest because they'll be fairly certain they can convert a few more later. Interest on the gold loan accruing daily. The people selling almost certainly know more than PIs, but that of course does not mean that the selling is due to the companies position it could be particular to the sellers position.

For the selling drying up, it's hit the price down to which they will sell is my expectation. I don't know if 0.6p is a magic number because a raise is coming at that value but I bet if 10m in buys pushed the price up 0.1-0.2p the selling would resume. Just a guess. And whoever is selling has more to sell than the market can reasonably buy so it's likely to be stalemate till the company put out their results or something else that gives an indication how they're doing.

A wild guess is Paracle selling either out of spite (to drop the sp into the raise) or actually exiting. Remember, there was a board reshuffle not so long ago and the chairman 'departed' stage left. If he and Emma aren't best mates then why not take the company down with it, especially if AIMS will be the ultimate benefactors. Just a guess though. The nomad is useless, I'd be real interested if anyone actually ever hears back from them. They're paid by the company of course.....

....meanwhile, where's Geezer? Is he buying? I find it odd not refuting every possible negative fact about the company when every fact about the company is, well, negative.

Chris I admire your enthusiasm and I was enthusiastic too, in the day. I bought into a company with virtually no debt (relative to production targets) sitting on a JORC resource of 650koz which even with gold well < $2k/oz looked a really good investment. The company hasn't delivered, it's that simple, and in the process shareholders got screwed. I lost 90% of my investment. It is still possible to lose 90% of your investment from the current level. It is of course, mathematically possible to make a 900% return from this level too. My money is just on the former not the latter. I have no idea why the sudden drop but it'll surface at some point for sure. What's sure is investors are sufficiently spooked that until some reassuring update, you're unlikely to see a lot of buying. If Emma could make an update, she surely would? Either an investor call or an RNS. If she isn't, and can't, that would be a worry....and if things were rosy 'insiders' would be buying the sells. All IMHO