MHM

Finally the inevitable offer for #BRCK ! Bit of pencil sharpening to do on the offer price though I had the numbers working well on an offer of 70p

I’ve been following #80M for the last few weeks to try to learn something about trading opportunities. I recognise everything I say now is said with perfect hindsight, but my thinking over the past weeks has been recorded and timestamped on @MHMembers. There has been lots of hype on here and bulletin boards about a quick multi-bagger and it looks like some have been able to achieve that, but at someone else’s cost. Lots of rocket emojis and using speculation that because Trump and Greenland have been in the news the Trumps are invested directly and Greenland oil is going to be gushing next week. Throw in the oil price with the Iran War and a US SPAC IPO ($PELI) and excitement has been fever pitch. What it mostly didn’t talk about was that the newly formed US traded company $GLND will be funding the venture long term so the 30% stake owned by #80M will likely be diluted unless it can raise the cash in the future to maintain its position, or sell it to someone who can. There was seemingly no knowledge by stock promotors that a ROFR (right of first refusal) on the 30% stake in Jameson existed, so there had been no reading of the very extensive and publicly available docs. ROFRs aren’t great as any potential buyers know they’re there and don’t want to do the work if someone can then just bid at their level. Different to a ROFO (right of first offer). There was little mention that while 2 wells are funded, they aren’t drilled yet and lots of risk remains before there are years of studies and permitting required before even building the infrastructure to start extracting any oil. There was great excitement yesterday in pre-market trading of $GLND shares in the US, but it’s difficult for a UK individual to access that and take advantage. It didn’t stop some frenzied ramping and yes, there was money to made on the spike in #80M up to 1.5p. But then the $GLND price came back down to a more reasonable 30% premium on the $10 deal price at the end of trading and 80M ended slightly down on the day. So it was a good spot originally to see the value of a potentially hidden asset and the catalyst of the IPO. Everyone focused on the RNS value of the stake the company put out, and management are still trying to sell that in an RNS this morning, but that wasn’t an independent valuation of the asset, just a number derived from an inherited replacement value of historical seismic and field data and the board used it as reasonable for the SPAC merger. Promoting this as the true fair value isn’t a great look. There very well may still be a lot of value there for long term shareholders if the drilling is successful. I may well be wrong and proven otherwise (I’m not a trader!), but for now, I mostly believe the last weeks have served to make rampers money at the expense of others. This is why @MHMembers has been created.

🚨Nicky’s Tip! Share of the month! 🚨🚀🚀🚀 The attention-grabbing headline on social media to draw you into thinking you’ll make life changing returns tomorrow. Covered #AVCT earlier (the positivity based on years of investment, detailed research and scenario modelling) and thoughts on #80M to come, but this isn’t the share tip you’re expecting… There are plenty of people posting them here and on bulletin boards with rocket emojis abound, but that’s not what @MHMembers is about. Ramping and rocket emojis are designed to make other people money, not you. We are looking to establish facts, make informed investment decisions and help individual investors generate better investment outcomes for themselves. For a detailed overview of our thoughts on navigating the markets and the costs of all the ‘helpers’ out there you can get our free guide (If AIM is a casino, can you beat the house?) via the link below. After decades in the city and financial markets, I believe the markets are designed to extract cash from retail investors for the benefit of institutions. You can beat the system, but individual investors need to act like an institution to level the playing field. There are numerous examples of individual investors taking action against company boards and management that aren’t acting in their best interests (Avacta, Bidstack, Physiomics), but organising action and understanding shareholder rights isn’t widespread enough. MHM aims to change that by becoming the ‘institution’ of individual investors. As an ‘institution’, we can utilise our shareholder rights effectively. We can also combine our research efforts to screen and evaluate the whole market and maintain a structured database of well understood actionable opportunities. The screening is well underway, and we’ve had several strong investment ideas posted already. Only one of them has been voted into the Model Portfolio so far. It’s a tough gig to get in, and it should be. There are lots of great contributors out there providing great investment and trade ideas, in many cases, for free. Some have a paid Substack, but it’s a difficult model for people to pay for one person’s ideas unless you’re a proven Warren Buffet. However, there’s enormous value in that brain trust and experience collaborating and I think they should get some reward for their work and be able to contribute in an environment where theses and model assumptions are debated without fear of idiotic abuse. These contributors are encouraged to join and contact us about our reward programs. But the rewards should be available to everyone with a great idea and so MHM has monthly cash rewards for the best investment and best trade ideas as well. Got to have some fun along the way! It really is a community designed to generate the best investment outcomes for individuals and reward those that contribute the value. But for all this, we do need to charge a little bit to: Discourage anonymous users that abuse free platforms because there’s no cost Cover platform operation costs Provide cash rewards for valuable contributors It’s still less than a London pint every month (sad to say!) for the opportunity to uncover great investment ideas and have access to a community that can take demonstrable action to improve investment outcomes. There are no obligations. A simple monthly fee you can cancel anytime. And the first month is free with code FIRST1000 so you can have a look around for no cost at all if it’s not for you. Find us here: mhmembers.com Download our free guide here: drive.google.com/uc?export=down…

Can say that now on #80M but that RNS was available long before yesterday and the comments in the interview created so much uncertainty that even you had to go and check with the company to clarify :-) RNS aren't always totally clear and it was a bit of a calamity yesterday. So what's the status of the 30% and what does the valuation actually mean and where does it come from? It isn't an independent valuation. From the filings: "the parties negotiated the $215 million pre-money enterprise valuation, with March GL providing technical data to support a valuation that reflected a discount to the $275 million replacement value of historical seismic and field data inherited from ARCO. The $215 million pre-money enterprise valuation was proposed by management of March GL and Greenland, each of which has extensive experience in upstream oil and gas development and geological analysis. Based on their technical expertise and experience with comparable projects, management believed the valuation reasonably reflected the risk-adjusted portfolio value of the Jameson Land Basin project and its potential to be advanced to a drill-ready state. The Board did not attempt to independently derive a separate numerical valuation under this approach, but instead evaluated whether the proposed valuation was reasonable based on, among other things: the project’s geological characteristics, development stage, capital requirements, market conditions, and the technical data inherited from ARCO. The Board also highly considered the fairness opinion of ERShares, which concluded that the consideration to be paid in the business combination was fair, from a financial point of view, to the Company’s shareholders. March GL provided technical data relating to historical seismic and field data inherited from ARCO. Management of March GL and Greenland estimated that recreating this data today would cost approximately $275 million, based on current costs for seismic acquisition, well data reproduction, processing, and interpretation, adjusted for inflation and market conditions. Management used this figure as a conservative estimate of replacement value, reflecting what it would cost to generate comparable data today. The Board did not treat this amount as a direct valuation of the business, but considered it as one supporting data point in assessing the strategic significance of the data and the reasonableness of the $215 million enterprise valuation. Based on these factors, the Board determined that the $215 million pre-money enterprise valuation was reasonable and in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders." The docs (clause 10.3) simply state "The Parties agree that, following completion of the Second Transfer, the Parties will commence negotiations in good faith for March GL to acquire the remaining thirty percent (30%) Participating Interest in the Jameson Concession from 80 Mile on the same terms as the Pelican Transaction (to the extent such transaction completes)." While it doesn't make sense for 80M to agree to sell at the current IPO price, this isn't totally clear from just this clause or the RNS. Why state at all "on the same terms as the Pelican Transaction" if it was just an open negotiation starting with a blank sheet of paper? However, clause 25.4 states explicitly "In the event that Second Closing does not take place prior to the end of the Option Period or the Parties fail to agree to the terms of the acquisition by March GL from 80 Mile of the remaining thirty percent (30%) Participating Interest in the Jameson Concession in accordance with Clause 10.3 within sixty (60) days of Second Closing, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, each Party shall have the right to sell, transfer or otherwise dispose of the Farm-out Interests held by them, to a third party (at their sole discretion), on any terms determined solely by such Party, provided that they have first offered such Farm-out Interests to the other Party first on the same terms as to be offered to the third party and given the other Party at least twenty (20) Business Days to consider whether to accept the offer or not. For the avoidance of doubt, the consent of the other Party is not required for a sale, transfer or disposal of Farm-out Interests pursuant to this Clause 25.4 provided that the pre-emption process set out in this Clause 25.4 has been followed." Not trying to stir the pot - I have no skin in this game. Thought clarification of the facts might be helpful.

Bingo #PYC Today's revised terms demonstrates exactly what I said in writing, the 0.30p deal was not in shareholders interest Today's announcement shows the board are eitger, naive incapable or complicit The dilution won't stop the requesition GM ✋️ londonstockexchange.com/news-article/P…

Just posted my latest investment idea with valuation model at @MHMembers . An opportunity that ticks almost every exciting buzzword with exposure to semiconductors, quantum computing and advanced materials. They seem intent on global domination. If that isn’t enough in the current climate, there’s a ‘hidden’ helium asset to boot. It’s a weekend reader – a complex business with quite some background and really no analyst coverage. Multiple high value shots on goal but still much to prove and there’s some hair around the history – will it prove to be a monster multi-bagger or crash and burn? The hype vs. reality conversation has started at MHM.