take over theory

A couple of quiet theories to share with you:

There is a select group of people who imo know EXACTLY what the big deal here really is, but no one is telling - as one would expect - and those holders would not agree that what is happening here is a bad thing - in fact the contrary - yes even for the leaching mini-shareholders like you and I.....and yes I am talking about the folks who are in the top 20.

There would be no point, or support from them, in the repeated dilution of their massive holdings, unless they knew their ship is in fact coming in by doing these things. They are the controlling holders.

you might argue against this theory, by suggesting that those holders are getting their moolah by way of free shares in these other seemingly "phantom companies", and sell them on-market. Wrong -impossible and they would not want that as volumes are low, and they would get jack for their holdings.

But remember that their holdings are that monstrous, that in the end, the only way for them to get their dough, is by a TAKEOVER - which seems like a joke for this mob, but I really do believe that this is about to happen, for CABE, Aurium, Greater Pacific, and Yellow Rock.

Another little theory:


Been doing some interesting reading.

A Company of stature from the land of Ting Tong wants the goods our companies have (Vanadium) plus a range of U-tenements in particular areas of Australia, but the valuable detail regarding these U-tenements (CABE's / YRR's / GPN's recent acquisitions) has been withheld from Ting Tong Ltd, to ensure those tenements end up on the GPN-group's balance sheet before Ting Tong Ltd finds out what and where.

Very soon we will find out if these theories are true.

I was very very upset recently about this remarkable, highly dilutive acquisition. I have settled down, and believe that all this is for good reason, and many will be sorry they were not on the train.

I am not in love with this stock, and I am not insane.

But that is my opinion, and I will stick to it unless proven wrong in the fullness of time.

Let's see shall we?