Spidey,
we must stop clenching seal flippers and simply react to observations of other shareholders with gusto and accuracy in a calm manner. Even if you are of a completely different opinion base, we can poke and prod with jest. You do not need to get all personally affronted when an opinion is different to yours.
You offer good information and research notes. That is recognised by others apparently. I certainly find some of that convenient and useful. You also seem to upset people often on several threads you post in, possibly they are challenged by your info being so comprehensive and challenging their views with facts.
You certainly are not positive on Walkabout Resources for example.
Marcus Aurelius is entitled to his opinion as much as you are, or anyone. He is obviously a bit of a lad who doesn't mind a bit of a wind up, but so what? Go home and make a nice stew, enjoy with some sparkling red Vitis Labrusco Fox cultivar from Fox Creek Winery and enjoy life with a refreshing glass of the good oil.
The observation is accurate, sir. Tormin sold shares at 40 cents then picked them up again at 14 cents. Questioning whether this looks awkward by way of stating the historical truths, is not defamatory, unless you are saying we may not have the right to do so, like some kind of dictatorship.
The sales info of those shares, which you have provided scanned copies of photocopies of, indicates that somehow you have your hands on the printed docs right there by your side, yet again at all times. But we can't keep a good man down for having an organised desk can we.
Still no mention of how they will pay out the former CEO, (which makes cash at bank look not so strong), as surely that must be coming due for resolution after all this time. Neither is there any info on how the funds from the "capital raising have been spent, or if this is what is actually making up the current cash at bank, therefore raising the question of exactly how strong is the real cash position of MRC. It seems like mathematical gymnastics trying to understand with clarity the exact position beyond the stated basic numbers in the quarterly. We await further in depth accounts information to clarify the exact position.
It does however look like playing catch up and will need several more quarters to survive and get on a steady keel with a good excess cash component in the bank.
Youhave stated as much yourself.
Lets see if anything further activity happens in relation to the takeovers panel in near future. Hopefully there is nothing left to come out on that from the flanks and everything can continue to get back to a secure future with solid performances for the company looking forwards.
Tactical corporate thinking is all about what comes from the flanks one would think and there are certainly many varying flanks in this theatre. Just waiting for the clowns and elephants on bicycles to come out of the flanks. How is the security onsite in Tormin? No updates on that. How has the cost of and efficiency of the purchasing programme come up through this pandemic period for example. Is there genuine training onsite exposing local workers to the diverse way of purchasing in a modern ASX listed company? What companies/agencies are listed to run these education programmes? Are they certified? Are there any staff claims of harassment being investigated in South Africa or at least has MRC prudently put a program in place to address this topic by way of education and a process to deal with any such issue pre-emptively, given all the furore at mining companies over this at the moment? #me_too
Have they being doing presentations recently for Ascension Graphite and if so, where and how are they doing this? If so, then we want to know as shareholders.
We want equal rights to information and access to capital raising opportunities on an equal footing. Not like the so called debacle last time.
If heaven forbid, the 3 supreme court cases with the former CEO are ruled against MRC, and my bet is that they will be, then perhaps the elephants and clowns can pay out Mr Caruso with popcorn vouchers.
Quarterly was well structured but it glossed over things in an effort to refocusattention and although this was smart on behalf of the new CEO's input obviously based on experience in big companies, the fact is that not acknowledging outstanding issues is akin to "sweeping things under the carpet" which might work and make sense in a brand rebuild sense, but it doesn't work in reality when there are many shareholders who paid attention to details the past 18 months or so and will not let it drop or be forgotten.
10.11.3 must be addressed bythenew CEO. That must be assessed and dealt with. It is not up to shareholders to run the company and monitor for problems, but we have the right to do so, however the onus is on the board to do so. There has been enough noise about this that is literally very appropriate for the CEO to investigate, get a formal legal opinion and make a statement to the market on the matter. This would put it to bed one way or the other. And if it is found to be a breach, then it is not the end of the world, it is just results in someone else owning the shares that were issued. (As long as the funds raised were used for the reasons allocated in the raising) Anything that has happened since that date will otherwise not be clear and will be sullied in the minds of many shareholders. Sacking the previous CEO Mr Caruso appeared to not have clear purpose that benefited the company and was dubious at best, but they could possibly get it across across the line in terms of unfair dismissal, but let's also see the outcome of the Supreme Court case regarding the datatheft and privacy breach matter, which according to public records MRC has already admitted being in possession of a storage device, which the Supreme Court ordered be handed over to an independent forensic investigative team.
Even if there is nothing of importance on it, this may still then fall into the breach of privacy field regardless, which is a whole other matter.
So yes, you post some good info, which is fine andpositiveand forward looking, but none of it acknowledges outstanding issues and how the outcomes and resolutions may effect things going forwards such as the capacity to do Ascent Graphite unhindered.
How can they realistically try and promote thissuccessfullywhen there are so many shareholders with so many concerns about matters that appear to have not transpired in a manner representative of professionalism and will likely do all they can in protest to hinder it untilprevious matters are dealt with?
And by the way, should 10.11.3 be dealt with and be found to be an issue, this in itself would not hinder the possibility of Ascent Graphite being given a shot, it merely would recalibrate what shares are sitting where and with who, and upon the subsequent review that would follow, any amendments to matters that arose post the capital raising date would be dealt with, but as you feel the cash position is improving then one could assume that Ascent could still proceed in some form or fashion. No one is saying ascent is bad in and of itself, I think people are just more concerned about the timing of the process and that it creates potential for loss of focus globally within the MRC ecosystem and that Ascent is not the strongest methodology for overall strength to MRC as a whole. It should be about benefitting MRC as a company, and not about appeasement to shareholders by issue fo shares in a new entity or rights to buy shares in a new entity etc.
It's all about the flanks old chap. Lets see in the next quarter what exciting activity unfolds.
(20min delay)