"Nobody is disputing that. Smh. Of course SOI is a sign of...

"Nobody is disputing that. Smh. Of course SOI is a sign of capital raises."

Erm... nobody? Except the people in the thread I'm replying to (I won't tag them - just read one page back and you'll see it all) :

• "shares on issue are irrelevant. nothing to see here"
• "if its profitable company it doesnt matter how many soi" (yet we're talking about an unprofitable junior miner)
• "[SOI] is not indicative of anything in particular" <--- this was you by the way @dizzan
• "SOI won't matter at all"

Short term memory loss here, or do you ignore points that don't fit your bias?

Funnily enough you were the one talking sense one page back, when @Bionic man made this very sensible post (https://hotcopper.com.au/posts/55286860/single), and you followed up with "So many posters on HC don't understand this." That was a great comment. The ones since... not so much. As for this:

"But if someone is looking at just SOI prior to making an investment, then that is a pretty silly investment strategy"

Nowhere has anyone said you should be "looking at just SOI prior to making an investment" - that would be a very dumb strategy indeed. But SOI has to be part of the equation when looking to buy into a company, for all the reasons noted about. It is not "irrelevant" as you finally seem to have acknowledged. It has to be something people consider.

Anyway, people can read the last page of this thread for themselves and make up their mind who is talking sense or not. The important thing here is that hopefully MGT holders won't get deceived by the comments I've bullet-pointed above.