Well ... you asked respectfully ... so here goes
Recently, I purchased to trade. Dreadful decision. I have noted that I am a very poor trader. I sold yesterday. A small loss so that's the way that goes. I fear it's going to go lower - just my view.
I also purchased QBL a number of years ago when the, "bauxite export bans in Indonesia" BS was a 'theme'.
There was, at that time, a strong contrarian poster who called this stock for the way he saw things. I read his posts and thought, 'wow this person is very anti QBL - I wonder why?'. He appeared to have some very good knowledge about mining etc. This caused me to look a little further into QBL.
Following that initial research, I concluded that QBL and now CGB companies were companies that seemed happy to shift from one thing to the next. All done while expending funds obtained, primarily from capital raisings from the public, on related party transactions and unsecured, interest free loans.
There's nothing wrong with changing course - it can be prudent to do so. However, shouldn't there be some kind of return for investors - that's why people invest - yes? If not, then often the BOD is held accountable. I don't see any accountability with CGB or it's predecessor QBL. I do see, for example, significant dilution and ongoing spending with no clear return (impaired loans to related parties) for holders. Can someone argue that that is not an accurate observation?
Ask yourself, why get out of the bauxite operation? Everything that I read from the company re South Johnstone was positive. What prompted the change? Well ... perhaps it's easier to raise new funds with a new idea?
Putting positive and negative to one side, I have yet to see anyone describe how an unsecured, interest free loan is of any advantage whatsoever to CGB shareholders? I can see how it advantages the borrower particularly if it is subsequently impaired by the provider of the funds. (HY Report for details of loans and impairments)
So we arrive at a net result as shown in the accumulated losses of $35 million dollars (HY Report). On top of those losses there is now CGA and possibly Africa, the US and Europe.
Turned the corner - some say? What corner was that exactly? I think they have been turning corners for so long that they are going around in circles.
You premised your question to me on, "Good to see the negatives ... so what about the positives?". I think that's the problem with the discourse around CGB and many other micro / small cap stocks on HC. Positive v negative and or, pro v contrarian. Either way, it is, in my view, a disposition. In my experience, dispositions tend not to be based on the weight of evidence / established facts but rather poster emotion.
I ask you, how can it be a matter of positives v negatives? Is it not a question of recognising the facts and drawing sensible conclusions from those facts, be they negative or positive and making decisions accordingly?
Read the HY report and note your conclusions. We might all benefit with you and some others sharing a factually based view / opinion?
If, I post factually incorrect information or draw unsubstantiated conclusions, then I will happily withdraw a post where that has occurred.
Positive v negative - it is what it is - how you feel about it is another matter entirely - I think.
Expand
