@Bailey241
Thanks for posting up the information.
Sorry
@mrmars101 but a few people seem to like what I've got to say and hopefully some of them have taken action as they would be out and not holding at 5.5 cents.
IMO you cannot beat objectivity and debate and IMO there is here (as in most stocks) are certain "cheerleader" group that have continually hyped up a one sided and quite often IMO an inaccurate view of where the company is at.
I'm not surprised to see SH purchase stock on market, in fact I said the other day that it would be the opportune time for him to do so and he did so good for him. IMO though it was predictable as the VRC marketing machine is quite consistently predictable as
@b4bmm has pointed out before with regards to announcements, press coverage etc.
IMO purchases on market like this one disclosed did little to convince me. I've read all the posts about directors being entitled to own other stocks etc, and that they can. But to hold TEN times more stock in your nearest competitor IMO is unacceptable and I just don't understand how anyone on this forum who holds stock finds this to be an acceptable situation.
As
@Graphene has pointed out recently and I have mentioned before , this is a race to production. There is limited customers, a limited market. This is not a ubiquitous commodity traded in a deep spot market like Iron Ore or any other major commodity for that matter. In fact
@kiwisparky quoted SH himself as saying this in his summary of the AGM.
Let's pose a hypothetical situation, it's probably highly unlikely but I will use it to illustrate a point. Say Tesla is in the final stages of choosing a Graphite supplier and in a closed meeting with VRC a Tesla representative mentions to SH and others that its come down to VRC and his former employer. Which company does he want to see Tesla choose? The one he's employed by or the one that he has 10 times the money tied up in?
I'm not saying this is going to happen but in a small and highly competitive market and a race to production it could. It's a conflict that IMO shouldn't exist. When I see people like
@Graphene say that he's basically thrown all his money at this company as an investment then why can't SH do the same? TO be truly on the same page that's what he needs to do because at the moment if VRC works then for SH it'll probably result in a nice little windfall compares to the other holding, its that plain and simple to me.
Other posters posting about buying motorbikes and looking at Ferraris, well that's fine but with every 10 cent movement or thereabouts in the other company he can go and buy another one.
I'm sorry but IMO this situation does not match with VRC shareholders. There's always reference to Fortescue in its infancy on this forum but tell me this, did Andrew Forrest have share positions in other Iron Ore hopefuls around him back then or was he "all in " in his own company. If for nothing else its about backing yourself and IMO having an investment ten times as large in your nearest competitor is having ten times more belief and faith in the management and project of your nearest competitor.
(20min delay)