Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Thanks AO, I have to say, I do enjoy reading your posts!
My investment in this company has done very well for me so far even though my profit isn't quite that high... yet! Part of my brewing frustration stems from my original investment thesis which was based on REEs... and 10 years later we are still trying to confirm REEs? I just feel that should've been done when Mark came on board and they were trying to figure out which elements to focus on. IMO it would make sense to confirm as many elements as possible to decide how to build the best economic case to investors. Having that additional information may have helped get the financiers off the fence a long time ago. (provided other REEs are economically viable). Maybe a fence wouldn't even exist if more REEs were initially included...
So yes, my ROI has been great but I know the potential for this investment is much higher or should be much higher. I've quietly and patiently experienced several catalysts come and go and I thought this quiet period was going to end differently...
I guess I just feel let down AGAIN... and the reasoning for my let down doesn't satisfy or make sense to me at the moment...
Many people on this board, like me, have life changing shares and they thought their life was really going to change when the investor meetings were canceled and NIOBF went quiet... That didn't happen so we are probably sitting here waiting for Mr. Smith to release the potential energy stored within NioCorp!!!
I'm hoping that happens in early 2022!!!!!!! :)
It doesn't make sense to me either so I am guessing that the information couldn't be the reason for cancelling the investor meetings. It also sounds like they are not going to state a specific reason either. My hope is that financing discussions were really close... so close that they thought it was worth pulling out of prescheduled meetings...
Regardless, the recent news ended up disappointing me and I will possibly wait another 6 months for the REE information to get folded into our numbers.
But why wasn't REEs included the first time around when it was known that the ore body possibly contained significant amounts of REEs?
I have faith in management but it is slowly being tested... I'm hoping 2022 is the year they finally break through!!!
I agree that the recent PR was just noise and I was kind of disappointed after reading it.
Here are several questions the came to mind after their latest PR:
1. Why did Niocorp cancel two investment opportunities for that REE information release?
2. Why didn't management not look at the economic viability when they were deciding which elements to focus on?
By doing #2 they could determine the most economical REEs as well as the ones they would need to get investors excited about the funding the project. At worst, the data would already be available if and when additional REEs became more valuable.
I've been holding well over 150,000 shares since Niocorp was Quantum Rear Earth and I'm hoping management has a major success soon! But I've been hoping for 10 years now....
I did feel a little let down at their latest PR release as I thought my hope would turn to happiness.
I'm up so far and hoping we head much higher in the near future. I hope we can revisit $1.04 USD in the next month or so....
I hope this important milestone really moves the stock price and volume higher starting tomorrow with a low dilution financing announcement soon afterwards!!!
NioCorp Receives Construction Air Permit from State of Nebraska for its Elk Creek Superalloy Materials Project
CENTENNIAL, Colo. (June 3, 2020) – NioCorp Developments Ltd. ("NioCorp" or the "Company") (TSX: NB; OTCQX: NIOBF) is pleased to announce that a final Construction Air Permit has been issued by the State of Nebraska for the Elk Creek Superalloy Materials Project (the “Project”).
The Construction Air Permit, in conjunction with the Special Use Permit issued in December 2019 by Johnson County, Nebraska, means that NioCorp is now positioned to launch construction activities at the Project site as soon as possible after Project financing is obtained.
“This was a very rigorous process and these types of permits are quite complex,” said Scott Honan, Vice President of Business Development for NioCorp and President of Elk Creek Resources Corp., NioCorp’s operating subsidiary. “The permit process requires assessing the potential emissions from each point in the mining and production process and then designing systems to capture and control those emissions. The degree of emissions control is very high … typically, 99% of emissions must be captured by control devices. I am very proud of how our team at NioCorp designed this facility in a manner that seeks to limit air emissions and mitigate other environmental impacts.”
“We want to thank Jim Macy and the staff of the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy for the thoroughness of their review and the professionalism with which they approach these processes,” Mr. Honan added. “I also want to thank Olsson, our Nebraska-based consulting firm, which helped us to assemble the permit application and shepherd it through the process.”
Mark Smith, CEO and Executive Chairman of NioCorp, said: “This is a huge milestone for the company and another major de-risking of the Elk Creek Project. Both the State of Nebraska and NioCorp take air quality, and environmental performance of this Project, very seriously. Our overall commitment to environmental performance is a foundational value for our Company.”
“I also want to thank the State of Nebraska and the officials involved in this process for their professionalism and diligence,” Mr. Smith added. “It is impressive that the State of Nebraska completed this effort while also battling the COVID-19 pandemic. That shows tremendous leadership by Jim Macy at NDEE and by the Governor Ricketts’ Administration, and it underscores the fact that Nebraska is willing to go the extra mile to encourage job-creating investment in the state during this challenging time while continuing to preserve and enforce environmental values.”
# # #
Twitter
Facebook
Website
Email
YouTube
LinkedIn
@NioCorp $NB $NIOBF #Niobium #Scandium #ElkCreek
For More Information
Contact Jim Sims, VP of External Affairs, NioCorp Developments Ltd., 720-639-4650, jim.sims@niocorp.com
About NioCorp
NioCorp is developing a superalloy materials project in Southeast Nebraska that will produce Niobium, Scandium, and Titanium. Niobium is used to produce superalloys as well as High Strength, Low Alloy ("HSLA") steel, which is a lighter, stronger steel used in automotive, structural, and pipeline applications. Scandium is a superalloy material that can be combined with Aluminum to make alloys with increased strength and improved corrosion resistance. Scandium also is a critical component of advanced solid oxide fuel cells. Titanium is used in various superalloys and is a key component of pigments used in paper, paint and plastics and is also used for aerospace applications, armor and medical implants.
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements contained in this document may constitute forward-looking statements, including statements regarding expectations that construction of the Project will launch as soon as possible after Project financing is obtained, and the Company’s ability to secure project financing. Readers are cautioned that such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause a change in such assumptions and the actual outcomes and estimates to be materially different from those estimated or anticipated future results, achievements or position expressed or implied by those forward-looking statements. Risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause NioCorp’s plans or prospects to change include risks related to the Company's ability to operate as a going concern; risks related to the Company's requirement of significant additional capital; changes in demand for and price of commodities (such as fuel and electricity) and currencies; changes in economic valuations of the Project, such as Net Present Value calculations, changes or disruptions in the securities markets; legislative, political or economic developments; the need to obtain permits and comply with laws and regulations and other regulatory requirements; the possibility that actual results of work may differ from projections/expectations or may not realize the perceived potential of NioCorp’s projects; risks of accidents, equipment breakdowns and labor disputes or other unanticipated difficulties or interruptions; the possibility of cost overruns or unanticipated expenses in development programs; operating or technical difficulties in connection with exploration, mining or development activities; the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development, including the risks of diminishing quantities of grades of reserves and resources; and the risks involved in the exploration, development and mining business and the risks set forth in the Company’s filings with Canadian securities regulators at www.sedar.com and the SEC at www.sec.gov. NioCorp disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
Hello All,
Here is a recent email I received from Jim Sims this evening...
IBC Advanced Alloys Announces Closing of its C$2M Non-Brokered Private Placement; Announces Additional C$284,000 Offering
FRANKLIN, IN – (December 13, 2019) – IBC Advanced Alloys Corp. (“IBC” or the “Company”) (TSX-V: IB; OTCQB: IAALF) is pleased to announce that it has closed the Company’s previously announced non-brokered private placement (the “Offering”).
Pursuant to the Offering, the Company issued 17,094,010 common shares of the Company (the "Common Shares") at a price of C$0.117 per Common Share for gross proceeds to the Company of approximately C$2,000,000.
The Common Shares issued pursuant to the Offering are subject to a four-month hold period in accordance with applicable Canadian securities laws.
The Company is also pleased to announce that due to strong demand for the Offering, the Company intends to offer, on a non-brokered private placement basis, up to an additional 2,105,000 Common Shares at a price of C$0.135 per Common Shares for additional gross proceeds to the Company of approximately C$284,000 (the “Additional Offering”).
It is expected that the Additional Offering will close on or before December 20, 2019 and is subject to the completion of formal documentation, receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals, including the approval of the TSX Venture Exchange (“TSXV”) and other customary conditions. The Common Shares sold pursuant to the Additional Offering will be subject to a four-month hold period, which will expire four months and one day from the date of closing.
Proceeds of the Offering and the Additional Offering will be used for working capital and general corporate purposes.
Mark Smith and Simon Anderson, directors of the Company, participated in the Offering by purchasing an aggregate of 3,380,230 Common Shares. Accordingly, the Offering constitutes a related-party transaction under Multilateral Instrument 61-101 - Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions (“MI 61-101”), and subject to participation by certain directors and officers, the Additional Offering may also constitute a related-party transaction. The transactions are exempt from the formal valuation and minority shareholder approval requirements of MI 61-101 pursuant to sections 5.5(a) and 5.7(1)(a) of MI 61-101 as neither the fair market value of any securities issued to nor the consideration paid by such persons would exceed 25% of the Company’s market capitalization. The Company did not file a material change report more than 21 days before the expected closing of the Offering as the details of the Offering and the participation therein by related parties of the Company were not settled prior to the closing of the Offering and the Company wished to close on an expedited basis for sound business reasons.
This news release does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy nor shall there be any sale of any of the securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful, including any of the securities in the United States of America. The securities have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "1933 Act") or any state securities laws and may not be offered or sold within the United States or to, or for account or benefit of, U.S. Persons (as defined in Regulation S under the 1933 Act) unless registered under the 1933 Act and applicable state securities laws, or an exemption from such registration requirements is available.
For more information on IBC and its innovative alloy products, go here.
On Behalf of the Board of Directors:
"Mark A. Smith”
Mark A. Smith, Board Chairman
# # #
Twitter
Facebook
Website
Contact:
Jim Sims, Director of Investor and Public Relations
IBC Advanced Alloys Corp.
+1 (303) 503-6203
Email: jim.sims@ibcadvancedalloys.com
Website: www.ibcadvancedalloys.com
@IBCAdvanced $IB $IAALF #beryllium #copper #F-35
ABOUT IBC ADVANCED ALLOYS CORP.
IBC is a leading beryllium and copper advanced alloys company serving a variety of industries such as defense, aerospace, automotive, telecommunications, precision manufacturing, and others. IBC's Copper Division manufactures and distributes a variety of copper alloys as castings and forgings, including beryllium copper, chrome copper, and aluminum bronze. IBC's Engineered Materials Division makes the Beralcast® family of alloys, which can be precision cast and are used in an increasing number of defense, aerospace, and other systems, including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. IBC's has production facilities in Indiana, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Missouri. The Company's common shares are traded on the TSX Venture Exchange under the symbol "IB" and the OTCQB under the symbol "IAALF".
CAUTIONARY STATEMENTS
The TSX Venture Exchange has not reviewed and does not accept responsibility for the adequacy of this news release. Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
Certain information contained in this news release may be forward-looking information or forward-looking statements as defined under applicable securities laws. Forward-looking information and forward-looking statements are often, but not always identified by the use of words such as "expect", "anticipate", "believe", "foresee", "could", "estimate", "goal", "intend", "plan", "seek", "will", "may" and "should" and similar expressions or words suggesting future outcomes. This news release includes forward-looking information and statements pertaining to, among other things, the expected closing date of the Additional Offering, participation by certain directors and officers and use of proceeds. Forward-looking statements involve substantial known and unknown risks and uncertainties, certain of which are beyond the Company's control including: the impact of general economic conditions in the areas in which the Company or its customers operate, including the semiconductor manufacturing and oil and gas industries, risks associated with manufacturing activities, changes in laws and regulations including the adoption of new environmental laws and regulations and changes in how they are interpreted and enforced, increased competition, the lack of availability of qualified personnel or management, limited availability of raw materials, fluctuations in commodity prices, foreign exchange or interest rates, stock market volatility and obtaining required approvals of regulatory authorities. As a result of these risks and uncertainties, the Company's future results, performance or achievements could differ materially from those expressed in these forward-looking statements. All statements included in this press release that address activities, events or developments that the Company expects, believes or anticipates will or may occur in the future are forward-looking statements. These statements are based on assumptions made by the Company based on its experience, perception of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments and other factors it believes are appropriate in the circumstances.
Please see “Risks Factors” in our Annual Information Form available under the Company’s profile at www.sedar.com, for information on the risks and uncertainties associated with our business. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information and statements, which speak only as of the date made. The forward-looking information and statements contained in this release represent our expectations as of the date of this release. We disclaim any intention or obligation or undertaking to update or revise any forward-looking information or statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required under applicable securities laws.
Copyright © 2019 IBC Advanced Alloys, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website, are a customer or someone with whom we have a commercial relationship, are an owner/shareholder in IBC, or are a member of the news media.
Our mailing address is:
IBC Advanced Alloys
401 Arvin Road
Franklin, IN 46131
Add us to your address book
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list
My thoughts on this are similar to yours...
Mark could use the Largo funds to start the Niocorp mine and access the German loan. This gets the project going significantly derisking the project. Niocorp's share price should continue to climb as the project progresses which will drastically reduce dilution when Niocorp taps equity to finish the project. Mark said minimizing dilution is one of his goals and this on way to reach this one... I am not sure if this is how the process works but I think it is a viable possibility...
I agree CritM3.
I don't think using Largo is a first or second option but Mark seems to like having more than two options at his disposal if possible. He is a long term planner that looks at various scenarios and plans accordingly. Largo may be his ace just in case Niocorp financing doesn't develop the way he wants. Most likely, Mark won't use Largo funds but I wouldn't be surprised if he taps some of the $750 million to further Niocorp's project....
Yes, he certainly would have to. I just get the sense that Mark is lining up multiple options like any good strategist should...
I posted about the $750 million raise last week and I posed the same question.
Why would Largo need to raise so much money when they are cash flowing and reducing their outstanding debt? My feeling is that Mark is creating a back up plan for NioCorp in case financing lags or is not too his liking. It can also be used as leverage to let interested parties know that their funds are welcome but are not needed. This may give NioCorp additional leverage during negotiations. Also, a small portion of the funds can be used to take a stake in NioCorp giving them the funds to start the project without needing to wait for outside parties. A Largo investment in NioCorp will further de-risk the project, raise the share price, and possibly reduce share dilution.
As I stated in the post I have no clue if my presumptions are accurate but I do think they are possibilities. Mark has often said that he is preparing for everything and the $750 million Largo fund raise may be another arrow in Niocorp's quiver!
Just my thoughts... and they could be wrong....
I don't think so. I posted what I found in its entirety and I didn't see any reason for the $750 mil. That is what started my speculation because I couldn't see why they needed so much cash. Even with Largo's expansion, I can't see why they would need to raise so much money. Largo is producing and selling their product and they have been paying off debt for the last six months... The only thing I could think of was Mark's connection to Largo and how they can use those funds in case negotiations stall. I would think Mark could use Largo as leverage to say we have the funds to begin this on our own. If you (another investor) wants to be part of this, then these are the terms that we (Niocorp) would like. Largo's participation in NioCorp may also help secure the German loan as well... I have no idea if this is correct but I just thought the Largo info was interesting...
I am not sure either so I thought I would ask. It seems Largo will be able to raise about $750 million with today's announcement. Could they then use a small portion of those funds to buy into NioCorp getting the project underway while continuing to pursue the remaining financing? I believe Largo has recently cleared some of their debt obligations as well. Combine that with their increased mining capacity and high ore price, Largo may be positioning themselves to move on Niocorp if needed... This is speculation on my part but I do see the possibilities... as well as the synergies... Or am I missing something?....
Hello All,
does anyone think Largo is positioning themselves to take a position in NioCorp with this latest filing? It seems this filing would be more than enough to get the ball rolling if Largo was able to pull it off! Your thoughts on this are much appreciated...
Largo Resources Announces Filing of Preliminary Short Form Base Shelf Prospectus
January 07, 2019
TORONTO, Jan. 7, 2019 /CNW/ - Largo Resources Ltd. ("Largo" or the "Company") (TSX: LGO) (OTCQX: LGORF) reports that it has filed a preliminary base shelf short form prospectus with the securities regulatory authorities in the provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario.
The base shelf prospectus, when final, will allow Largo and certain of its security holders to qualify the distribution by way of prospectus of up to $750 million of common shares, debt securities, subscription receipts, warrants and units (all of the foregoing, collectively, the "Securities") or any combination thereof, during the 25-month period that the base shelf prospectus is effective. The specific terms of any offering of Securities under the base shelf prospectus will be set forth in a shelf prospectus supplement, which will be filed with the applicable Canadian securities regulatory authorities in connection with any such offering.
This news release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of these Securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to the registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such jurisdiction.
A copy of the preliminary short form base shelf prospectus can be found on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.
Yes I was able to purchase some shares I was looking to add earlier this week.
Post 10076 has a link that brings you directly to the new Youtube demonstration video.
I was able to access the youtube video showing the new patent pending prototype. It looks pretty good!
No one asking you to. I'm just saying what I know based on my experience working with SFOR. Hopefully their contracts have changed. You can always ask Mark or George about it and see what they say.
I can share my personal experience with SFOR as much as I like and you and no one else can tell me to keep it to myself. You don't have to believe what I say and that is certainly up to you. You can remain blind to what someone says or listen and investigate on your own. And just because I send a link for you to look at, doesn't mean the information on the link is accurate. More research would need to be done to verify it!
I worked with management directly. I know what their price structure was because I put in work for them. I don't need to prove anything to you. Believe what you want to believe and explore your investments how you see fit. If you never look at the downfalls of an investment then that's just how you operate. I really don't care...
I agree with you. But their contracts with the resellers in the past were not friendly to SFOR. Most of the profit went to the resellers. This may be different with retail distribution as I am not aware of that contract structure. If it's similar to their contracts with their online resellers then their profit margins are really thin.
It's not an uneducated guess. As stated in the past, I have worked directly with the company, I've visited their office in NJ, and I have been told by directly by management what their margins are. Now this is in the past, and I stated that this may have changed in the present. I also, said IF the margins haven't changed from when I worked with SFOR then I know directly that their margins are a lot lower than they can be. The margin potential is there but when I worked with them a lot of it went to resellers. I know this for a fact because I worked with them and management told me this directly. Unlike many investors, I actually got active with SFOR in order to help... can you say the same? If you can't then don't tell me I'm making assumptions without knowing the facts of my history with SFOR... After all you're just making assumptions yourself!
I agree with that. Showing strong sales outside of lawsuits will add tremendous value to the company. I do believe the cost per sale is too high though... SFOR doesn't earn enough money for each GuardedID sale... This could have changed but based on their old structure their take home revenue was really small. Hopefully my information is outdated...
I am long SFOR but I agree with your post. You make some valid points...
Some people on this board feel like just because they won one lawsuit that everything is going to be great for them. Personally, I would never count that money until it comes in. As I posted previously, it is more important for SFOR to drive product sales in short term to show how well they are doing. Lawsuits do not add to steady cashflow. Having sales is good but how much profit is derived from each sale is equally important. Looking at the cost to acquire those sales needs to be factored in.
If SFOR is building out new software then I can see where there money is going. Hopefully into products that will drive new sales... But just having the product doesn't mean you can sell it or sell enough of it to be profitable.
I do hope that SFOR continues to drive their product sales while lowering their cost structure... But as you stated, anything can happen. They might get bought out... or they may fall flat on their faces!
As I have worked with SFOR directly in the past, personally use GuardedID, and own many shares, I do hope they improve their sales and cost structure!
My thoughts exactly! Integrating registration within the app would make the process a lot easier for all customers!
I certainly agree with you as well SmallBuy. That settlement with Microsoft gave SFOR a lifeline to really energize the company. They now are able to move in the direction you mentioned regarding lawsuits with full force and they've also used some funds to revamp their retail strategy. I think both areas are important. Stronger retail sales helps pay the bills until the lawsuits are settled while also boosting our stock price. Add that to more lawsuit settlements and we have a share price explosion!
lol I like that one!
I agree that retail may not be their biggest market but the potential is huge. The sales of SFOR products outside of their retail products take a long time to work through the sales process, sometimes taking over a year to develop. Retail numbers are hard and fast. Showing strong retail sales not only adds to quarterly numbers but it is immediate cash SFOR can use. Additionally, each year the company increases it's revenues as retail customers renew their license. That combined with new retail sales can really drive revenue numbers.... That can have a big impact in pushing the stock price higher... just my thoughts...
SFOR can ask for two way authentication but I don't think the average person downloading an app expects that. I know I surely didn't. Since most customers don't expect that then the company should explain that before the app is downloaded or within the app when you first try to use.
The download was easy.... getting it to work on my iPhone was not.
They should've explained that on the app before you purchase it. My experience with buying apps is you download and open the app, not wait for an email to unlock or sign into the app.
Looks like I messed up the process but SFOR should be more clear on how to smoothly use the app before a customer uses it. Or they can have the app direct you you or have you verify that you received your email from SFOR before proceeding to log into the MobileTrust the first time... just some thoughts...
MobileTrust was a nightmare to install.
I just bought it on the Apple Store on Sunday and I still haven't been able to use it. I've been going back and forth with customer service on how to install it correctly and letting them know the installation of MobileTrust should be much smoother if they want more people to use it.
I will say that customer service is more responsive this time around compared to when I purchased GuardedID through Element5 years ago... Still buying MobileTrust and using it should not take days of emailing customer service in order to use it. The bad news is that I still haven't had the opportunity to try it out because I can't load it onto my phone!
Their gross revenues will be within that range but their net will be much lower. Part of the challenge with SFOR's finances is that they don't keep most of the profit on each sale of GID. I am not sure of how the other products are structured but it may be similar with MobileTrust as well.
SFOR pays retailers a lot of money to sell the product and transact the sale that they only keep pennies on the dollar. Maybe their new website has changed this where they are now controlling the sale but if not, their net will be significantly lower than your projects.
Regardless I would love to see them sell that within or above that range as that would still show major revenue growth on their part, show they are building a solid customer base, and provide them with good year-over-year revenue increases as the majority of this years customers renew next year!
I've been a GID customer for years now and and shareholder over a similar period. I sincerely hope SFOR is finally ready to make some major moves in 2016 and beyond...
I tried but didn't get my order filled.
I agree with you Jose.... First I waited for HYSR to hit the 1.5V threshold and now I am hearing about density... This is the first time I've heard that density was even an issue. I thought HYSR just had to increase the voltage to make the process more stable... It does seem like there is always a new problem to solve after they solved the one they said they HAD to solve... I'm just sitting and waiting on this one...
Yes I am seeing that too in my TD Ameritrade but I don't see that on my Yahoo... I was hoping to buy more shares today under $.70/share. We'll see what happens at the open!
Agreed. I am long on Niocorp and I look at the pullback as an opportunity to increase my share count. I am currently waiting for more investment funds to clear so I can add more. I also am not a fan of a share price that accelerates too quickly... An extremely fast rise is usually followed by an extremely fast crash... I prefer nice steady growth with many up days and a few minor pull back days sprinkled in....
Personally, I wouldn't mind a little pull back so I can add some additional shares! lol If German investors are hoping for great news coming out of the meeting and they happen to be disappointed afterwards, I will gladly buy some of their shares if they sell....
That is a good perspective Sean.
If that was their plan the should just stated they are doing an investor update without calling it a "special" update. Then again, maybe "special" meant that this update was specifically for the banking community they are developing relationships with.
Regardless, this was a call I certainly did not need to be on. It was a waste of an hour...
But I am happy the stock dipped as I did add more shares today! I will continue to add shares if the SP goes lower over the next couple months.
Oh man, that was a standard presentation... Very professional but certainly nothing "special" there! I heard all of that information before. They should of just said we are having an investor update and excluded that one little adjective! lol
I actually hope there is resulting share price drop so I can get my hands on some more shares!
Still very long!!!!
I will be happy if there is a solid update as well but I don't think you need a special meeting just to give a solid update. Mark has provided many solid updates that were never announced before hand. That is why I think this one is indeed "special".
I also don't think it is a dry run for the public meeting based on the relationship they already developed with the community and Mark's experienced team. They know how to treat people and they are very good at what they do. I don't think they need a live test run to warm up. If they were concerned about the meeting going well wouldn't they run a private walk through to make sure they covered all the basis?
I could be totally wrong here though.... What's great about this situation is that all board members have the luxury of being weathermen and women today. We get to forecast tomorrow's outcome and our special project will still be ok if we happen to be wrong! lol
I, myself, am forecasting bright sunny skies and warm southerly winds. That will be a "very very exciting" forecast, indeed!
Let's see what happens tomorrow and everyone can discuss the meeting, outcome, and ramifications in the evening...
I'm getting excited and I hope you are too!!!