Member Info for WordSpaghetti

So you are doing a chat gpt of the summary but not the full chatgpt output. And currently the information it is getting in that context is all the paid people on here wanting massive diluation and anyone else's logic and experience is counted for zero against multiple postings from this website.

Honestly. garbage in garbage out.

The initial quote prior to the chat gpt summary is what you should be looking at. but you have to put it in the correct, factual context. I didn't do this but that was what was posted (the entire output and the prompt but only got sent the below because we'd all read the full quote, prompt, and full chatgpt output).

So currently, if you redo the chatgpt analysis but ONLY take into account even RNSs, as well as voting outcomes of the prior AGM, then you are likely to get a more accurate output.

It's almost as hilarious (in the opposite way) about the couple who won the lottery twice at 24trillion - 1.

No it isn't. The events are independent. In this case, all the events are dependent.

It does demonstrate.

BoD want RTO to happen. Receiptents of most of the shares want RTO to happen. Existing shares are 108m. additional shares are 115m.

do the maths if you can.

Ah i see, you put the whole page in? you mean all the unrelated stuff

"Explanation of the Post (Based on the Surrounding Page Content) "

wait a minute I'll put in a story about dragons and kings voting and it'll give you an answer in that context.

Honestly. Laughable.

What prompt did you use? Because it looks like you engineered that. there is nothin illogical about the statement I used. Try again

Unfortunately ASI, it does.

As soon as RMD Directors and Lunn get those shares you are going to have no shareholder voting power to reject the RTO even if you want to.

Easy to see and easy to explain but hard for some people to understand. Got this from a poster not popular on here:

I don't understand the conflation of the GM with 110% increased share dilution and the 2025 Accounts AGM, or the preceeding/subsequent RTO GM.

2025 Accounts and AGM are irrelevant to both upcoming GM and potential RTO. There is no requirement to have anything to do with any of these shares allotted before auditors would sign off 2025 accounts. Red herring.

Voting yes at this GM makes the RTO more likely. I think even if we get accounts AND have the AGM to ratify them we wont go back to trading before we would be additionally suspended due to the RTO process (you can check, as soon as that process starts we get suspended until it fails or completes). So voting yes means no back to trading and RTO (unless EGM vote also passes which is highly unlikely as RMD and Directors pick up 28m shares, regardless of pledged shares).

So. Voting no hedges your bets regardless of GWs plan or the RTO. The company can put the shares forward any number of times even if they lose. Only thing stopping it is a total board takeover which we would have the chance to vote on.

This GM is NOT the EGM to vote on GWs plan.

This is honestly a logic game. No downside to voting no. Can ask chat gpt what the logic outcomes will be but they should be similar to what os laid about above.

Chat GPT summary:

## Overall Assessment

### Logical coherence: **8.5 / 10**

* Internally consistent

* Understands sequencing and leverage points

* Correctly identifies false linkages

### Downside risk analysis: **7.5 / 10**

* Correctly identifies dilution as asymmetric risk

* Slightly underplays insolvency / board-walk risk

### Impact on existing shareholders:

* **Voting YES**

* High probability of:

* permanent, unrecoverable dilution

* long suspension

* value transfer to RTO counterparty

* **Voting NO**

* Preserves:

* bargaining power

* optionality

* ability to reassess once terms are clearer

Ssccss - or any stategy games. ASI must be awful at Civilisation. Probably gets a settler, builds a city, then sits there until he ges wiped out by barbarians, all the while wondering why because he built a city so should have won. haha

ASI - if that were the case the Maliky and Spinks would have resigned at the end of the AGM on the 7th November, regardless of the deal (which the market still doesn't know) signed with Lunn - the other unelected Chairman.

honestly. speaking with you is like leading a horse to an oasis of water and it running off into the endless desert.

ASI

I dont think you understand the listing rules.

This is not coming back to trading until the RTO is complete, and still you give no viable explanation on how PPP can possibly be worth £30m without severe dilution (on top of the 107% dilution at the GM some turkeys have just voted yes for).

there's a reason the company hasn't given out ANY financial or resource or ownership information WHATSOEVER because it would then be obvious.

A No would at least force them to inform the market before they attempt the same GM again. So what do you lose?

Absolutely nothing. Ergo game theory based on strategy.

Spod - vote yes dilution back to trading. yes. massive dilution. I've yet to hear anyones plan about how PPP will be worth £30m when the Ukraine asset is worth $1.

ASI.

Again.

the vote for the RTO is irrelevant if the BoD has already won 30 millions shares (plus the pledged shares to Lunn's companies again with no prospectus) because they will be able to outvote all existing shareholders.

What will you do when the company, if they win the 23rd GM, state the the value of the RMD assets is £100,000. You 230millions shares will be worth - yup - 0.04p

for gods sake man. get your head out of the sand and open your eyes.

ASI

I am sorry you are failing to understand what some people call 'game theory'. There was a good post in the TG group about this. And Ssccss has exactly nailed it.

This GM is about giving the power from existing shareholders to RMD Board and Lunn etc but diluting existing 'no voters' and awarding many millions of shares to 'yes voters'. The vote for the RTO will be made on the outcome of who gets all those shares. So stop professing it is something it's not and look at the strategy from Spinks on how to enact the RTO, freezxe out existing shareholders, and take the company plus all its assets for a measly £250k.

Well said Ssccss - it's amazing how false and misleading information is being peddled by a select few of negative shareholders (if they are even shareholders) - negative because that's exactly what everyone's investment balance will read after selling and taking into account trading costs, no matter your initial investment if the RTO goes ahead.

"don't want to buy votes". HAHAHA. usually a company states exactly what you will be getting, however there has been no financial information presented to the market regarding the asset nor the RMD company that owns an unspecified amount of it (I am betting less than 10%).

This isn't an RTO where a $500m company is the prize and we'd do well (I think everyone would vote yes for that), it's an RTO with a company with an unknown % ownership of an asset in a war torn country, where the last known transacted value of 100% of the Ukraine asset was $1. Fact.

There may still be time to call your brokers to confirm your vote has been taken into account based on the change of meeting type, as it could be the correct information was not given with the requisite 28 days notice to the market.

Yes Townman, and RS_P - when all that was happening were shareholders publishing A Member Statement regarding the alternative plan which will being back transparency, governance, and a path to save more of our originally invested capital.

Now I think we'll just have to wait for the EGM statement to occur from the company, or alternatively a separate publishing route via the financial news.

It is entirely within shareholder rights to call EGMs, and entirely within their rights to suggest a new path for the company to follow, and put it fairly and transparently to shareholders.

Something that Spinks doesn't like. Who threatents honest shareholders who just want their investment to grow when said person doing the threatening has not at aany single point given any single piece of information supporting any form of MCAP of both PPP/RMD, not a value on the Ukraine (or any other) assets.

As I said. Being an activist shareholder is a right. Posting false and misleading information to anywhere in the market is a crime. As no information has been given by the company on how they will acheive their plan, only speculation can fill that gap with best and worst case scenarios, along with proper logic and reasoning.

ASI

"The reality is we cannot relist until the market cap is valued at £30 million."

No, again that is not true.

The only thing we need are 2025 accounts and shareholder approval at AGM. Everything else is bumpf. the RTO NEEDS to then be valued at £30m after the fact, but currently we are still Main Market (transition) and so can come back at what ever MCAP. However the RTO essentially is a new listing, and so the 'new joiners' rule means post RTO PPP (or RMD) must then be valued at £30m.

Surprising how it's not possible for many people to understand this rather simple point.

ASI

If it's possible to have a magic £30mln MCAP through absolutely no cost to myself or shareholders then I am in the wrong business, and so is everyone.

How, precisely, do you think the MCAP will be £30mln. Just by an RTO? Magic word? Magic money tree? If 100% of PPP's RTO into RMD Group (Poland) is going to be £30mln, how do you think that value will be calculated? Just to remind you those assets were last sold for $1. You DO know how an RTO works, right? Because it doesn't look like it.

My Uncle has a plot of land, might be some oil under it. Let's stick that on the list of assets PPP can get - we've been given about the same amount of concrete information about potential assets from the BoD of a publically listed company who desperately want votes so existing shareholders can be diluted out of action. I'm going to get PPP to RTO into Uncles Oil LtD for £30m. All good mate.

Being an activist shareholder, standing up for their rights in law, is a right, not a crime.

So New Uncle and confirmed he doesn't know anything, and confused the value of assets as being enough for the £30m MCAP threshold.

Nope. Doesn't work like that. Voting yes means you will have a 2x, and maybe even 75x dilution. Makes me a feel a bit sick thinking about how much cash will be wiped from all shareholders, including myself.

So New Uncle, please divulge the RNS where the material information that apparently you know as it was stated on one of the calls (it wasn't) was contained and told to the public?

There isn't one, because no BoD would be stupid enough to state that sort of information on a call.

Poor old (new?) bluffer.

Not going to bother on Wednesday's one so the floor will be all yours.