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.
Yup - Quickly entering the death spiral here - IMO
They are a publicly traded company in the middle of a asset based deal. They can not keep information from investors.
Thank you again for being childish.
Why again does no one see we are in control?!?!?!?! Scott works for us, the investors. He must perfom in a manner that is in our best interest. Nothing more. The deal is the deal, but that does not mean that we should not discuss.
Use my concerns as a medium to boast others confidence.
Newbie's right.
Scott not around right now. I attempt to see if he is on business or pleasure, but no response from the Merlester.
d0l..... You are 100% correct. As an individual investor you can not short pinks.
Brokerage firms most likely could, maybe, however they almost always have policies to prevent any involvement in pink sheet stocks.
Most items I post here I send to Merle to ask for clarification.
Merle knows me well and I know him well. He would read the last 150 post and laugh it off.
You are most likely correct. The vote will pass as yes.
I refuse to take a passive role in my investment.
Again, you, as many here have approach me as if I am an emotional (scared) ihubber. I have approached my complaints via passages in the DC with out emotion.
I refuse to sit back and not voice my thoughts on the DC. My words are true and without motivation other then dissecting this deal, and forcing management to deliver.
Please re-read your post and determine where there is value to others. I am attempting to dissect our future word by word,as a good business man does, and you are painting broad strokes to state "its a done deal."
This is a discussion board. Let's discuss. Why are you certain the DC is in our best interest? I may be missing the golden lining.
I have been long here, and you can read my post history to see how backing of this company I have been. I can not easily be dismissed. I am concerned with the deal.
I have shared my displeasure with the DC outcome. Please share the words you found within the DC that build confidence in our future.
Did you happen to notice most of these new posters showed up after the price decline?
Stop blaming the evil shorts......... We need to start blaming Keevil.
Plan and simple. His non-disclosure MO has caught up with him.
Alan....... You said something profound.
Hey bud....... I get the feeling the DC has shaken some people free. I no personally the DC has been eye opening. They may be speaking out now because we still hold the power via the vote to voice our opinions.
hahaha. Too funny
Shareholder MAY own 65-75%................ We may not just as easily.
Hit my post limit. More on Monday. Have a good weekend.
IMO
And some full expected Scott to provide a clear and detail DC for us to become informed, and allow us to make a decision on the option.
If Scott is truly waging a "war" on the shorts we are in trouble. He needs to be focusing on running the company and accomplishing milestones. I am becoming very frustrated with everyone point the finger in all directions except the true problem. Scott has not delivered. The share price reflects this fact.
IMO
Alan,
Scott makes 127K a year off of share holder dilution. Roughly 4.2 million shares a year. This eliminates a lot of the shares he has been using for development. Now he wants another 100 million shares? Why? All capital raised has been moved to the Nio Star holding company. So...... As share holders of SRSR we are paying for current development of Nio Star. I guarantee we will not receive a pay back of 1 for 1 in the form of a share option for current holders.
We are being diluted to pay for Nio Star, and then we are only going to receive a % of Nio star.
IMO
No joke. This deal should be spelled out line item by line item.
I should have elaborated....... A deal requires 0 uncertainties as to what the deal entails.
We do not even know what company is involved. Scott may be the owner of HKHE?????!!!!!! What if he is simply handing the billion dollar property to himself?
There is a 50% chance when the music stops SRSR shareholders do not have a seat. This is not acceptable amount of information.
No. Unfortunately No.............
He is spinning out to HKHE. That is clearly defined and their percentage of their involvement is clearly defined, well somewhat defined. (30-35%) There is no question where the asset is heading. No other deal will be involved with SRSR. Nio Star may be split again, but that would come under the Nio Star organization.
The only portion of the option that is vague is if the current share holders of SRSR will receive anything in the deal.
IMO
I know. I read the freaking DC over and over and over...... hoping I was missing that "Ah Ha" moment. It's not in there.
And the typos............. A college student could have drafted that 16 pages in an evening to meet a deadline. It took them months to compose, and they couldn't even proof read the dam thing.
Now I am just nit picking.
IMO
Are we certain we are attending? Did the Asian conference actual name SRSR or Nio Star?
Hispeed.......
He is going to appoint himself to the Board of Nio-Star. He will simply issue himself as many shares as he determines to be fair of Nio-Star as his compensation package. Scott does not care about his SRSR shares, or he would have exercised his options to receive more.
He has barely invested any of his own funds into this project. Wasn't he given 30 million shares to join the board?
So, he has no motivation to control the deal. He could say he spins out Nio star for 1 for 1000 for SRSR. Then he can simply announce he has received 50 million shares in Nio star to become the CEO and Director of the Board.
He has the ability to control shares......... he does not need a strong deal like we do as investors.
IMO
Your votes will be cast in the direction of the directors. So yes would be your vote.
If the board was urging share holders to vote NO, ie hostel takeover, you would vote no by abstaining.
Here here........ I don't care who Scott Keevil is or who he is related to in his family. I do not care who is invested in this company.
I care about one matter. SHARE PRICE. I have not invested my money here because Scott is honest, loyal, true, or good looking...... I invested here because I felt he could deliver a return on my investment.
IMO
All,
I do not believe Scott will screw us either, however he has left himself in a position where he could do so if he decided to screw us.
The DC has left him the ability to spin the Niobium property out without any connection to shareholder or SRSR. I do not think his intention is to screw us, but I am much more comfortable placing my money on a deal where the CEO "can not" screw the shareholders. Much better position then the CEO "may not" screw shareholders.
The DC has truly painted Scott in a new light to me. I have been a die hard supporter of this company and Scott for 3 years. I, with you, can not support the actions laid out in the DC. I am planning on voting NO on all fronts including the re-election of Scott to the board. His performance, both in share price, and in development, does not defend his appointment to the role. He needs to remember who he is beholding to in his current role; The share holders. I am certain that Scott will be re-elected, but he should receive enough NOs to open his eyes that his performance is being judged, and if he does wish to be a part of this project he must earn that right.
IMO
MM,
I contact Merle frequently enough he now proactively calls me to discuss PRs when it hits the news wire. I can share that I have stressed my discontent with Merle.
Time frames mean nothing to me. I will wait an additional 15 years if Scott can deliver a plan I can live with as an investor. However, our recent DC is an insult in my eyes.
After reading the DC about 100 times...... There is no guarantee if we VOTE YES on the Nio-Star spin out SRSR shareholders will ever see a share of Nio-Star. As a DC is a legal document the fact that Scott stated we "MAY" spin out the shares allows him to also allows him to legally take the position of MAY NOT.
These are my concerns.
IMO
JP........ Great questions..........
I wish I had the answers. I may sleep better at night. 10m CDN is not enough to complete the stages you have listed in your post.
I really wish I knew....... and we should know, but our CEO won't share the information.
I will take my best guess.
1) HKHE is supposedly going to capitalize this stage of development. To my understanding the per-feasibilty almost like a pilot to the feasibility study. Less expensive and less detailed. Basically if the pre-feas comes back strong we launch the feasibility study.
2) After pre-feasibilty. This will be an extremely detail report that will move the minerals to reserve status and allow for Scott to use the minerals to receive a loan from the bank for funding. This stage will cost upwards of 25 million bucks.
3) I was under the impression that the scoping study had already been completed. Mmaybe someone can confirm.
4)About another 150 drill holes, and 3d graphing of the entire area. Feasiblity would complete as well. Also about another 5-6 NI reports. in short........ a ton of work.
5) As Scott states "if" we go to another exchange 18 months. In the DC that states after the spin out they may attempt to improve our exchange. Again...... Scott has failed to show a true direction and left share holders questioning his direction.
Once we accomplish, or may be more appropriate IF we accomplish, many of these stages we should be extremely pleased with the share price.
IMO
Bill Gates drop out of Harvard. Just getting into Harvard places him in the top 1% of students.
Scott's education is relevant. He is in a technical discipline of geology. Since Cam's involvement has been greatly dismissed via the DC I would say Scott's education is more relevant then ever. Without the minute to minute advice of a Geologist........ .That leaves Scott...... And hopefully his education regarding Geology.
IMO
JP...... Keevil time is tough to predict
2-6 years.......... but after feasibility the share price should be north of 2 bucks.
imo
Many people have shared that view and are no longer capitalized in the market. Not saying this will occur here (hoping at least....... that would be a tough loss for me) but that advice is very dangerous.
IMO
Very true feasibility and NI reports will add value, however the DC states that Nio Star, after the option is executed, will perform Pre- Feasibility and scoping. The DC did nothing to add value to SRSR.
IMO
It is not grossly simple.
In my opinion the verbiage of the DC does not assure that SRSR share holders will receive Nio star shares.
In my opinion that is not enough information to vote on the matter. Would you have felt comfortable voting after the PR announcing the potential option? I would not have, and the DC basically was a re-print of that PR. Most on this board were very excited about receiving more information about the deal, and we simply did not receive more information.
IMO
Hispeed.
I am shocked by the whole report.
Personally HKHE should already been shared with investors. I can not understand how Scott would expect shareholders to vote on an unknown company.
To paraphrase.
Scott expects use to vote for giving a billion dollar asset to an unknown company for an unknown amount of money with the potential for an unknown listing that we MAY receive shares of in the future.
Not acceptable. We may never know the source of HKHE.
IMO
JP,
A few stages need to occur......
1) Audit financials (nio is done)
2) Feasibility study needs to be complete
3) Minerals must move from resource to reserve
4) better reporting exchange
Until then..... no "large" investors will touch our gem.
IMO
you too...... I still have my champagne on ice
I'm still hanging in as well. This has been an emotional roller coaster........... I was on cloud 9 drooling over what this DC would bring to the table, and boommmmmmm They reprinted the same vague PR.
I really struggle with the increase in AS, even if they do not plan to use it. Our share structure is high enough in my eyes. I also do not like that they keep using the term "may" when they reference giving shares of Nio-Star to SRSR holders. WAY to vague for my taste. Compounding this notion is that fact they clearly lay out the shining tree spin out....Why not nio star?
Underneath it all I do not agree with Scott on how this is being handled, but I have trusted him for 3 years, whats another 6-8 months.
It may be a rough Shareholders meeting for him....... I am not certain he will be well received at the podium.
Thanks JF.
IMO
Thanks JF........ whats your gut telling ya?
Thanks Show........ I am going to be re-reading the document tonight. Hopefully some hidden gems jump to the surface. I was hoping, (deeply believing) this document would not require the fine tooth comb.
Thanks.