Member Info for Zoffy

Ah, yes, the classic Bureaucratic Physics Equation—a bold attempt to explain governmental red tape with the precision of a toddler explaining quantum mechanics. Let’s break this down:

"T - B / P → ML": Apparently, we’re dividing bureaucracy (B) by patience (P). Bold move, considering patience tends to hit zero faster than a mining company’s optimism.

"Time is a linear function": Sure, but this conveniently ignores that bureaucratic time moves on a different axis—more like a Möbius strip of delays, meetings, and coffee breaks.

"P[ML] asymptotically approaches 1": Ah, asymptotes—fancy math for “we’re technically closer, but you’ll never actually get there.” It’s like chasing the horizon or a government official answering an email in under a week.

"Cold, hard equations": These equations are about as cold and hard as a lukewarm bowl of alphabet soup.

In short, this is less a formula but a paid ramper "We’re closer than we’ve ever been! (But don’t hold your breath.)"

No problems buyin a million on II....Not that I would. I'm not that bonkers...!

BUY

Est. available 5,828,494

1,000,000

£8,790.00

Quoted Price

LSE

Open

£0.00879

Don't know where you are getting this shortgae of shares from. Just did a quote on II for a million shares and no issues...

£8,770.00

Last Quote

24/01/25

14:27:31

LSE

Open

Chesh. It's not worth shorting currently. I'll wait for the next unjustifed price rise and then maybe a teeny weeny short.

PUB LOL you wish clearly the current SP 📉 does not suggest this comment "Get ready to party like it’s 1994; except this time, the SP’s hitting 0.94p (today), and the only thing dropping is the confetti! "

They may need bigger premises for storage of additional shares.... 🤣🤣🤣

Pub. No matter how much you try to gloss this up the market is not interested.

LOL

MM manipulation., Tree shake, Great buying opportunity and other rampers favourites....

Only thing HE1 stands to gain at this rate is more shares in issue....

Have you missed me today? Thought I'd say hello.

MCNol I looked at your profile posting history and don't see the IG link posted by you. I don't think an apology is necessary...

MCNol that's cheap. At least you could have the decency to reflect on the artice I posted from IG below.

Alans55 I provide an objective view. Sometimes I'm short sometimes I'm long. Each to their own... DYOR

IG article

https://www.ig.com/en/trading-strategies/_where-could-the-helium-one-share-price-go-in-2025--250116

Blubay. I actually bought a few of these last week. I do offer a balanced view as opposed to some of the nonsensical ramping on here by the guilty few with their rockets and balloons.

It will be what it will be.

MrNewbie in response to your comment "Zoffy- There will not be a massive drop!!! we are not here for the small bit of meat on the bone in America... we are here for the bigger prize...."

Thye will not have a proven funding stream if the new drills are not commercially viable. You need to be a little more objective. Nothing is guaranteed in this game. We all know that bad news affects any SP exponentially more than good news. You must take a balanced view.

This was already priced in. I'm surprised it has managed a 4% increase...

Should positive flow rates get notifed from these 2 drills then you will see a good rise. However if they are dusters/low flows be prepared for a massive drop.

What's the timeline for the drills getting to target depth?

HereforHemo.... So many assumptions that all will go to plan. You need some realism in your post.

Let's look objectively at Pubcrawl's rampy post...

The flow rate projection of 285 Mcfd assumes a stabilized rate within the range of 250-350 Mcfd. However:

Stabilized production is often optimistic and can decline significantly over time due to reservoir depletion or operational challenges.

The cited maximum rate of 441 Mcfd is not sustainable for long-term production and may only represent an initial test result.

The helium concentration of 1.9% in State-16 is at the lower end of what is typically considered commercially viable. Helium extraction at low concentrations can lead to higher operational costs.

The extrapolation from 6 wells to 30 wells is highly speculative. It assumes uniform success, production rates, and helium concentrations across all wells, which is unrealistic in resource development.

Drilling additional wells involves geological, mechanical, and economic risks. Discoveries may not guarantee similar production levels.

Additional infrastructure for 30 wells would likely require significant capital beyond the initial $8.2 million.

Nice start to the turnaround. All 1% of it. Yet another baseless prediction fails to materialise...

Anyone consder speculation should DYOR and not be driven by the ramping brigade.