Member Info for zumore

You're jumping the gun on the cobalt because RRR still don't have a cobalt asset. To point PIs in the right direction here's a selection of the RNSes that talk about the extensions on the due dilligence and the possible acquisition. RNS 5th Dec: rnshttp://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=RRR&ArticleCode=u090hhz9&ArticleHeadline=Further_Extension_of_Due_Diligence_Period RNS 3rd Nov: http://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=RRR&ArticleCode=qxddhkxf&ArticleHeadline=Extension_of_Due_Diligence_Period RNS 26th September: http://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=RRR&ArticleCode=byszrhjq&ArticleHeadline=Conditional_JV_to_develop_cobaltcopper_tailings

I guess a good example is Kenya. They were deeply unimpressed with tiny RRR so got their asset snatched. On the other hand the big mining companies can operate successfully there.

Last post from me this afternoon. Yes Bell/Kaintz know the DRC risks. I think it's a pretty expensive risk but they make the investment decisions at RRR. Before i go i'll tell you a mistake i think Bell makes. He often name drops huge mining companies who operate successfully in these unstable African countries and he assumes because they operate successfully then a tiny company like RRR or RGM will also be able to operate successfully. But i suspect the reality in these unstable countries is these huge mining companies are like famous stars and so they can jump the queue and they are given special favours; on the other hand i suspect tiny companies are nobodies and so they are given no special favours and so they have to stay at the back of the queue. So i personally think it's very naive of Bell to think that just because famous huge mining companies operate successfully in these unstable countries then a small company like RRR or RGM will be able to do the same. So i personally think the Congo investment would be an huge risk for RRR.

Just to make clear that quoted post in my 12.16pm post was Okenia's views (from 2nd Oct 2017) on Red Rock's possible Congo Cobalt investment. So again to make myself clear it wasn't my view but his view.

Ok Okenia i share your worry on the possible DRC investment from 2nd October: "What, a contaminated tailings 'asset' in a war torn and corrupt country with hazy rule of law and ownership ? Oh and an Ebola hotspot. What's not to like? I can see it being just the sort of retail investor friendly story that they'd lap up and ramp enthusiastically! Boom boom rocket to the moon ... (And even if Monarch still flew there, I suspect there wouldn't be much of an appetite for an 'investor visit')"

I was watching a tv programme the other day and it said that there is more refugees attempting to flee Congo everyday than the number of refugees attempting to flee Syria everyday. I think the number of refugees attempting to flee Congo everyday was 5000.

REPORTED!!! If you haven't got the ability to be civil to fellow posters on this forum then you probably shouldn't be posting. After all these years you still cannot grasp that this lse forum allows opposing views on a company. How many more years is it going to take you to realise that?

I think all Kaintz and Bell know is they need to get this share price moving because it's getting pretty complicated with these differing shares that need to be converted. . Helpful, i'm sure they would ideally like you CLN holders to convert your 0.80p CLNs in RRR shares. But just like a warrant holder wouldn't convert at the warrant price they'll know that you CLN holders won't be converting at the 0.80p CLN price. To be honest if i were holding RRR CLNs at 0.80p then i wouldn't even consider converting them into RRR shares unless this share price reached over 1p because i'd obviously want to make sure they weren't going to make me a loss. Though it's really difficult for the CLN holders because if this share price went over 1p and most CLN holders converted .. then if Bell/Kaintz soon after announced that the Congo deal had completed and then RRR issued the Congo sellers £490,000 in RRR shares at a strike price of 0.65p a share: then if such a thing happened then you'd think that the RRR share price would fall to around 0.65p which of course would be sickening for all those CLN holders who had converted their CLNs into RRR shares but who hadn't sold. So on reflection if i were a CLN holder i probably wouldn't even consider converting them into RRR shares until the Congo deal had been sorted either way. Also i'd be very worried if Steelmin would be paying RRR back the loan in February: so again i'd probably hold off until it was revealed if Steelmin would be paying back the loan in February. Like i say pretty complicated.

The lse chart doesn't include todays share price. So this is the 6th trading day at around this share price.

"The Variable Conversion Price means 90 per cent. of the lowest daily volume-weighted average price at which the Shares have traded in the 5 trading days prior to each Conversion;" http://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=RGM&ArticleCode=ic7xwuht&ArticleHeadline=Convertible_Loan ......................... Just glancing at the lse share price chart i see it's now 5 full trading days with the RGM share price at around todays price. I'm not the best at working out vwap prices but if YA did start to convert RGMs debt into RGM shares around now then if you take the average mid term RGM price these past 5 trading days (around 0.525p) and then take a 10% discount off that share price then that could mean YA could convert well under 0.50p. Of course i've been wrong numerous times in the past and so YA may not be even thinking about converting.

interview with this chairman and i cannot say i was impressed. Late last year and for much of this year coking coal was RGM's main focus, it was supposed to bring in lots of revenue and make RGM self supportive. Yet in this interview very little from this RGM chairman on the coal and i just sensed the coking coal is being quietly swept under the RGM carpet and i felt now his main focus is on acquiring non cash generating battery related assets. Also on Mambare he said because exporation costs a lot of money then RGM would first need a deep pocketed partner to enable more exploration to be done there. So i've got to be honest i wasn't impressed with what i heard in this interview.

reminds me of the pumpers who speak with total authority, some think they are directing them to fortunes, but they are not: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZYMnmHgIks And this next clip reminds me of Bell as he tries to juggle all these loans and tries to pay them back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6QgHUJIQ5Q

Hi Booboo i don't know why but when the pump squad suddenly go quiet then i get slightly suspicious. And as Mike pointed out earlier this morning, PJ did a 24 minute interview and he mentioned all the companies he usually pumps, except one, and that company he didn't mention was RGM. To be honest i think i'm leaning more towards a placing because PJ has ramped RGM into the mid 0.70s on numerous ocassions and so i doubt he would be giving up and bailing out of RGM at this price. So i'm suspecting the quietness is because he wants some lower price placing shares (of course along with warrants). Of course may be completely wrong. But like you say let's watch this space.

I think it was indivestor who suggested PJ may start selling. So not you booboo.

Yes agree booboo. Plus if they paid £250,000 for Moscicki's 80% stake in CMC then they take over Rosa + the $1.65 million Rosa debt. The November 25th 2016 RNS says that $1.65 debt was supposed to be paid off at $25,000 a month. That may not seem a lot but $25,000 extra cash needed a month soon eats away at the money. Though Johnson also keeps quiet when he's offloading shares. You said that earlier so you may be right about that.

Because not a peep these past two or so days from PJ or some other well known RGM rampers. To me that is highly unusual because PJ is usually pumping away non stop about RGM. So I may be well off the mark here but don't say his deathly RGM silence means he's participating in an RGM placing? Of course because of recent incoming UKOG and ALBA money you'd think no chance but I feel there may be one.

in my earlier post today I definitely wasn't excusing them for lying to PIs in rnses. In my 10.52 post I said: "So the duo of Kaintz and Bell should definitely be sacked because RNS after RNS they misled PIs ; it seems they were just lazily reporting what Stephen Moscicki was telling them without first checking whether it was true" ................

Yes Mike i remember that and that date coincides with the 20th April rns. There is also a 20th April periscope video that Bell did with Malcolm Palle in the RGM office (It can be found on RGM twitter) In it the RGM chairman looks deliriously happy when he talks how the Rosa mine will be starting coal production once the coal face is put at a nicer safer angle and the overgrowing shrubs are removed from the coal face. He says these minor things will happen quickly and then Rosa coal production would start. From that periscope video i'm convinced he actually believed that. But like i say it's shocking that he just relied on what Moscicki was telling them without first going to the coal mines to check out what Moscicki was telling them was actually the truth. In my opinion both Bell and Kaintz should've been sacked.

No in the 24 minute video he didn't mention them. But how on earth would he have put a positive spin on the RGM management team of Bell and Kaintz? He knows and most PIs know that Bell and Kaintz should've been sacked for their atrocious coal investments and their misreporting in lots of their coal rnses. http://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=RGM&ArticleCode=llyi9pst&ArticleHeadline=Coal_Update http://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=RGM&ArticleCode=aj5jglq1&ArticleHeadline=Project_Update_Placing_and_TVR Looking at the two above rnses (from April 20 + May 3rd) and the RGM management duo were making out that from the proceeds of the numerous placings that two coal mines were about to start coal production. But PIs were being misled because coal production at those two coal mines never happened. So the duo of Kaintz and Bell should definitely be sacked because RNS after RNS they misled PIs ; it seems they were just lazily reporting what Stephen Moscicki was telling them without first checking whether it was true. And how annoying for PIs that when these coal mines were supposedly nearing coal production that PIs watched this chairman most days during work hours tweeting away about non work related subjects, and they know he should've instead been over in America making sure that Moscicki was telling the truth about these coal mines nearing coal production. So total mismanagement and wasted the company fortunes that Bell didn't do that. And of course total mismanagement by the duo that they invested in Moscicki in the first place. They later shifted the total blame on Moscicki but if they had done adequate due dilligence they would've avoided investing with Moscicki in the first place. That they originally wrongly concluded that Moscicki was investment material is in my opinion sackable. ................................ And yes booboo i wouldn't be surprised if YA have begun converting RGM's huge YA debt into RGM shares

Somebody will correct me if i'm wrong. But i believe the board of directors are prevented from buying company shares 60 days or so leading up to the annual report? So if true ^^ some might have thought that now that the annual report has been released that the board of directors might think about buying company shares. But it looks like it's the free shares they want and not the bought shares.