Shaft Sink Share Discussion Threads

[hedgehog 100] 18/7/2014 14:36

muckshifter 17 Jul'14 - 22:36 - 2528 of 2529 0 0
"... OK Hedgehog, I realise it is pointless arguing with you because you refuse to address points, change the subject, twist anything I say, ignore facts, make up your own "facts" to suit your argument, etc, ... "


Muckshifter, that is actually a very good description of what you yourself do.

[muckshifter] 18/7/2014 10:37

"Hedgehog 100
16 Jul'14 - 18:49 - 2523 of 2524
In being dishonestly attacked by Muckshifter I am in very good company: the respected Mineweb Russian correspondent John Helmer -

From 9 October 2007:
"An interview with Mineweb Russian correspondent John Helmer
He's the doyen of the foreign press corps in Russia, and a tough, no-nonsense investigative reporter.
... If mining correspondents do their job, they must act independently of the mining companies who sponsor and advertise in the mining media. It isn't the job of the mining correspondent to be friendly; it's his job to be truthful. ... "
"

I think most people would question the sanity of someone persistently calling a respected journalist dishonest with such a lack of substance to justify such attacks."



The second, of many Helmer points that deserve a serious look, for the same reason – invention of "facts" and twisting what others have said (just like his acolyte Hedgehog), would be the $500 / tonne that he invents as the market price of Potash that Eurochem need to "break even"

In this article:

Helmer gives this quotation by Strezhnev, Eurochem's chief executive:
"When we studied the profitability of this project, it was profitable even at a potash price of $500. We do not expect prices to go lower than $700-$800, so our investments carry almost no financial risks."

Note that Strezhnev doesn't say how profitable (imho, it would be very highly profitable @ $500 / tonne).

And Helmer then deliberately misses out this bit from an earlier article of his which explains why Strezhnev used the $500 figure; "He was responding to a market warning, issued a few weeks ago, by Bill Doyle, chief executive of Potash Corporation, the Canadian and world leader in potash production. According to Doyle, the price for taking delivery of potash at the minehead needs to increase to $560 to $570 per tonne to stimulate development of undeveloped deposits.", ie. Bill Doyle had set the $500 figure rolling, not Strezhnev.
This is Helmers earlier article:


Helmer then follows this omission by apparently changing the $500/tonne figure from profitable, but how profitable we do not know, to a "break even" figure in his business insider article, and then stating that:
"During the five years in which Shaft Sinkers has been excavating at Gremyachinskoye potash has failed to reach Eurochem's breakeven point." (Shft were excavating, or at least in contract before suspension, for just less than 3.5 years)
He then displays an infomine graph of potash prices:
which in itself shows that his statement is untrue, since the potash price is shown to have been above $500 for 30% of the operational contract period (July 2008 to December 2011).

My own rough estimates of the likely cost of Eurochem production, done in four ways last summer on the "Shaftsinkers the thread for debate not bile" thread, in posts 54, 66, 74 & 102 showed that the Eurochem mine would have been profitable at the prices shown in that graph for the whole period in question (and since).

Just another example of the methods employed by our "investigative journalist"

And of course a major contribution to his dishonest theory.

[muckshifter] 17/7/2014 22:36

"Hedgehog 100
16 Jul'14 - 18:49 - 2523 of 2524
In being dishonestly attacked by Muckshifter I am in very good company: the respected Mineweb Russian correspondent John Helmer -

From 9 October 2007:
"An interview with Mineweb Russian correspondent John Helmer
He's the doyen of the foreign press corps in Russia, and a tough, no-nonsense investigative reporter.
... If mining correspondents do their job, they must act independently of the mining companies who sponsor and advertise in the mining media. It isn't the job of the mining correspondent to be friendly; it's his job to be truthful. ... "
"

I think most people would question the sanity of someone persistently calling a respected journalist dishonest with such a lack of substance to justify such attacks.

And you might also get the impression that the side John Helmer is supporting is in Russia, and the other side in another country to Russia: but actually, the reverse is the case. I.e. the opposite of what you would expect if he is dishonestly biased."



OK Hedgehog, I realise it is pointless arguing with you because you refuse to address points, change the subject, twist anything I say, ignore facts, make up your own "facts" to suit your argument, etc, but I'll just give a quick example of the dishonestly / incompetence in Helmer's article for others to consider. I'm not at all surprised that you are such an admirer of Helmer because you both are deliberately economical with the truth / lie, distort what others say, etc. Helmer, to his credit, hasn't sunk to your level of childish name calling.

And of course his publisher says he's a good investigative jouralist – surprise, surprise!

Just taking, from the Helmer article you've been pushing endlessly:


one simple example from that article:
"The Eurochem contract – Shaft Sinkers's biggest, representing about 30% of its order book – enabled Shaft Sinkers to move from private ownership shared between Shroder and black empowerment enterprise partners to an IPO on the London stock market in December 2010."

There used to be a short history on shft's website, which has now been removed. It made clear that at the time of negotiation of the Eurochem contract, ownership of shft was 54% IMR and Schroder owned no part of the company. This history is still there, however, on page 21 of the IPO prospectus, amongst other places.


It's hard to believe that an "investigative journalist" could get it that wrong, particularly as there was also a widely publicised case, six weeks before Helmer's article was published, by Eurochem against IMR as the 54% owner of shft, at the time of negotiation and letting of the Eurochem contract.
Here is one of many articles about that case, you would think Helmer would be aware of this:


So why did Helmer come up with the theory that Schroder, a man who afaics, never owned any of shaft sinkers at any time, was co – owner of shft with a couple of African companies at the time of negotiation and finalisation of the Eurochem contract?

In my opinion it was a "fact" that he simply made up himself, as he did with many other points in his article, because it suited his story of the innocent contractor and the devious client, and kept the notorious IMR out of the picture as far as the pre-contract events were concerned. It was also the fact that Schroder had conveniently left the company.

So perhaps Hedgehog you could explain how your hero got it that wrong, in those circumstances, without being dishonest or inept – but you won't will you – you'll try to change the subject as usual.


But....... on the subject of Schroder.
A couple of months ago, I was reading the shft IPO document for some reason, when information about Rob Schroder's departure caught my eye, and made me think. At the time, Hedgehog was having a brief spell of good behaviour as I remember it, so I decided to keep my thoughts to myself. But he's back to normal lying and twisting now, so here was what went through my mind.

I knew Rob Schroder had left soon after the flotation, but hadn't realised the potentially enormous financial benefit* that he had relinquished by his sudden resignation, which seems to have been followed by a few months without employment(*as that benefit would have appeared at flotation time, and at the time of his resignation if you believed the published forecasts).

Although the announcement of his resignation, and six months notice, was given in July 2011 the RNS didn't actually state the date of his resignation, and he left the company in August, meaning that on the basis of six months notice perhaps he resigned in February – probably not an auspicious time from the company's point of view, for such an announcement, within two months of flotation.

At that stage in February, everything looked very good for shft as confirmed by analysts and tipsters in various journals, together with multiple bulletin board posters who were all predicting results which should have triggered maximum bonus payments and LTIP vesting of shares. Meaning that Schroder probably relinquished something around £1m for the 2011 year, and higher annual sums for the remaining period, if the predicted good times continued for the next two years.

In the immortal words so popular here on advfn, perhaps he knew something! As Chief Operating Executive, he must have been very well aware of the serious progress problems at Eurochem, as well as presumably the existence of the "suppressed" pre contract negative report about the use of the grouting technique, and the fact that there was an "offside" Eurochem employee involved, although he was not one of the shft executives employed by IMR. His background was in quantity surveying, the branch of the civil engineering profession which traditionally takes the lead in dealing with contract disputes and is usually heavily involved in assessing tenders and agreeing finalisation of the terms of a contract before signing, so he certainly would have had a better idea than most, of the likely outcome at Eurochem.

[buywell2] 17/7/2014 16:20

case a basket

form any 3 into a well known phrase or saying

[hedgehog 100] 17/7/2014 15:46

16 Jul'14 - 21:05 - 2524 of 2525 0 0
"muckshifter
So it looks like the financing will come AFTER the arbitration outcome
By which time the share price might be circa 4p"


Buywell,

The arbitration decision isn't actually due until January 2015:

30/04/2014 07:02 UKREG Shaft Sinkers Holdings Plc Final Results
"... Dealing with these damaging allegations continues to take up a significant amount of board and management time as well as financial resources. We have made a number of substantive submissions to the arbitrators, and expect the hearing to occur in mid 2014 with final determinations expected early in 2015. ..."



That above extract also highlights how damaging these allegations have been to SHFT's business.

It would be ironic indeed if SHFT is sent into administration, but then wins the arbitration.

[wylecoyote] 17/7/2014 12:55

Muckshifter,

a year later than expected, yet this still broke the 10.0p target that you had in mind. HH, Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

[buywell2] 16/7/2014 21:05

muckshifter

So it looks like the financing will come AFTER the arbitration outcome

By which time the share price might be circa 4p

[hedgehog 100] 16/7/2014 18:49

In being dishonestly attacked by Muckshifter I am in very good company: the respected Mineweb Russian correspondent John Helmer -

From 9 October 2007:
"An interview with Mineweb Russian correspondent John Helmer
He's the doyen of the foreign press corps in Russia, and a tough, no-nonsense investigative reporter.
... If mining correspondents do their job, they must act independently of the mining companies who sponsor and advertise in the mining media. It isn't the job of the mining correspondent to be friendly; it's his job to be truthful. ... "
"

I think most people would question the sanity of someone persistently calling a respected journalist dishonest with such a lack of substance to justify such attacks.

And you might also get the impression that the side John Helmer is supporting is in Russia, and the other side in another country to Russia: but actually, the reverse is the case. I.e. the opposite of what you would expect if he is dishonestly biased.


And from the thread "IOFINA Iodine, gas, water!!, maybe Oil (Bakken) (IOF)" -

muckshifter 1 May'13 - 11:12 - 22538 of 26283 4 0

"I find it very sad that decent posters allow themselves to be driven from a forum by trolls.

If you start another board, the troll will come with you, with or without the same name.

The most sensible solution to trolls is to put them on ignore, and persuade the whole decent population of the board to do the same. If there are some who cannot resist responding, put them on ignore also, after explaining your intentions and giving a chance to change tack. Lack of response of any kind is the only thing that defeats trolls. Having to start a new thread constitutes a victory for the troll.
Regards."




Muckshifter used his gravitas and authority to undermine the posting of an Iofina bear, by referring to him as a troll.

Iofina shareholders may therefore well have concluded that it was OK to ignore the bear's warnings.

And the Iofina share price subsequently collapsed by about 90%.


As usual, there has been no recognition of the situation by Muckshifter.

In contrast, I have at least faced up the situation in SHFT, acknowledging quite some time ago that the situation had changed.


Finally, yet more evidence to discredit Muckshifter's ludicrous contention that I must have known he didn't work in mining. The Motley Fool questionnaire from 2006 that he has claimed revealed that he didn't work in mining. -



No where in this does he state that he doesn't work in mining.

He reveals that his industry is construction, but also that he knows the mining industry well, and that indicated to me that he might work in mining construction.

[buywell2] 15/7/2014 07:37

The SHFT BOD are delaying getting the finance they need

This is inexcusable

Why ?

Because after the recent news of sales of their HQ and other bits of the company to raise cash they could have acted whilst the share price was over 10p.

Now it is dropping to 6p

Like I said the cash raising exercise would have to be at around 4p a share if it took place today a 37.5% ish discount to the current SP


The longer the delay the lower the share price = the greater the dilution



When they made the recent announcement they should have made announcement of a deal to raise cash.


Why didn't they ?

[the stigologist] 13/7/2014 12:55

if you live with your headupyourownasshog100 then you probably can't tell the difference between muckshifting and shaft sinking

[muckshifter] 13/7/2014 11:31

Still as dishonest as ever then Hedgehog.
Post 2515.
How did I cost Iofina investors money by writing two posts, approx. six months apart, on an Iofina thread, one mildly positive (very, very mildly by comparison with almost every one of your hundreds of shft posts during the same period) and one which didn't even mention Iofina, it was about a poster who was deliberately annoying serious posters - bit like you really hedgehog. Explain that - or will you just change the subject as usual?

Where did I suggest that shft were imminently going bust? Another lie?

Where did I INSIST that shft were being run as a subsidiary of IMR? Another of your constant misrepresentations of my posts. I've always made the point very clearly that IMR owned 54% of shft at the time of negotiation and agreement of the Eurochem contract, and that the two executive directors who almost certainly carried out those negotiations on behalf of shft were actually employed by IMR at the time, meaning that, imho, each of the two companies would have been entirely aware of the actions of the other. Explain how the contract could have been awarded without them as IMR employees being involved.

I note that as usual you choose to reproduce the newspaper report which is more favourable to your view, rather than the Moscow times one which makes clear that the case between Eurochem and IMR is not over as far as Eurochem are concerned, and that Eurochem's spokesperson said that they have obtained important evidence subsequent to earlier submissions (which is what I suggested perhaps as much as a year ago would be the outcome of the arbitration).

Unlike you hedgehog, I don't try, and have no interest at all in "calling" day to day fluctuations in shft, or any other company's share price. And unlike you I do not try to influence a share price, that's why you write hundreds and hundreds of incredibly positive posts about any company you are invested in, and attack posters who do not agree with you. My points are "long term" and intended to inform long term investors of things they may well not know and need to consider – particularly when they are being mislead by a dishonest poster such as you, which is something I've demonstrably done for the last 14 years. On the other hand, how many times was it that you "called the bottom" with shft at much higher prices than the current one, must have been at least five times.

Post 2516.
That post is such poisonous pointless drivel that it's hardly worth replying to. But I notice you are trying to hint at one of your old favourites again in terms of dishonest representation of my past, after probably 20 to 30 previous attempts to pretend that I had some sort of work related motivation for posting negatively about shft, by this bit:
"Flooding the internet with such claims could have helped to undermine confidence in SHFT in the eyes of anyone reading them, helping to create a self-fulfilling prophecy (to the benefit of competitors etc.)"

Shows yet again, after it had being clearly demonstrated in post 2491 above, how dishonest your claim in post 2490 (and several others) was, ie.:
"I've in the past suggested/asked re. you perhaps work for a rival to SHFT, as a possibility, because I and others don't believe that someone will devote hundreds of hours to attacking a company that they say they have, and never will have, an investment interest in, for no good reason.

But since the time that you have explained that you're not a miner, I have never said that you do the same type of work as SHFT.

And as for this rubbish:
"Anyone who has lost money here, should see Muchshifter's blame in that ... and perhaps consider reporting him to the financial authorities."

I would repeat my response to your earlier "threat" to contact Helmer because in your opinion I was libellous
GET ON WITH IT
At least that way. the only people who will know what a fool you are, would be you and the recipient of your communication.

Post 2517.
Helmer's post contained minor errors – don't make me laugh. It was absolutely dishonest drivel, with at least seven serious "errors" in the core of his argument by a so called investigative journalist, every one of which contributed to his nonsense conclusion.

Still trying to wriggle out of your dishonest insinuations about my work, despite having clearly read back posts of mine on advfn, and coming up with a seven year old post of mine on TMF which clearly indicated that my work was motorways etc – what a twister you are.
And the point about googling "muckshifter" is that if you didn't know the difference between muckshifting and tunnelling / shaft sinking etc, muckshifter, or muckshifting are well known terms in the Civil Engineering industry and would have cleared your ignorance up in about five seconds, but despite being told many times that I was a muckshifter, not a miner / shaft sinker /etc, you prefered to continue with your dishonesty, and in fact are still trying to hint at a motivation based on a connection to mining.

[hedgehog 100] 12/7/2014 21:00

Muckshifter,

Some quick comments on this post (extracts only):

muckshifter 9 Jul'14 - 20:58 - 2491 of 2516 0 1

"It is a matter of fact, that a so called investigative journalist wrote an article which contained many lies, or if you prefer to believe that he was just a completely inept and incompetent investigative journalist, mistakes. ... " ...

" ...Muckshifter response post 1968 on 22/5/13 shft thread at 18.30:
.. "I've never worked in tunnelling or shaft sinking, but I know people who have."

Didn't take you long to try the same dishonest drivel again did it hedgehog:
Hedgehog post 1973 22/5/13 on shft board at 22.01
"... muckshifter...He is intelligent, articulate, and apparently works in the mining industry ... "


Re. Helmer's article: they were some minor errors, of the sort you yourself make, that I have posted.
But nothing that invalidated his central thesis.


Re. your work: yes, I saw that you hadn't worked in tunnelling or shaft sinking ... but how did that tell me that you didn't work in any other aspect of mining?

In addition, I haven't read more than a small proportion of your posts, and I only started posting on SHFT last year, and did not read many historic SHFT posts.

I have also probably read / scanned a million posts over the past few years, and would not necessarily see everything, pick up on its significance, or remember it.

As regards googling you to see what you did? Why should I have felt the need to? And I don't know who you are in any case.


If you want to accuse me of sometimes being too optimist ... well maybe sometimes in the past I have been, in line with my sunny, optimistic personality ... though I do try to have a realistic view.

But I do NOT lie.

If I know that someone works as a postman, I would not call them a dentist.
If I know someone works as a farmer, I would not call them an accountant.
Etc., etc.

In conclusion, for God's sake, for all our sake's, please just give it as rest!!

[rcturner2] 12/7/2014 06:18

I don't have a prediction, and anyone making one is just guessing. Next question?

[hedgehog 100] 11/7/2014 20:30

RCTurner2 11 Jul'14 - 18:50 - 16 of 18 0 1(premium)
"I must have missed when it was strong! I don't remember that lol.
You have pumping this dog for years ..."


Actually, my first post on SHFT was only in 2013.

And your bear calls seemed to be followed by periods of very good SHFT performance, of which there have been a couple of very good ones over the last couple of years, e.g. a gain of about two thirds between October 2012 and February 2013, and a similar gain from the low last July.


Is trawling ADVFN calling stocks that have fallen 'dogs', many of which subsequently rebound massively, really skilful and intelligent analysis?

Those that make good predictions don't really feel the need to broadcast it.


So let's test you.

What is your prediction for the SHFT-EuroChem judgement in January 2015 ... or is that too difficult a question?!

[the stigologist] 11/7/2014 19:02

just desserts for headuphisownasshog100

SHFTed by shft

[rcturner2] 11/7/2014 18:53

RCTurner2 19 Oct'12 - 08:13 - 1567 of 2514 0 0 edit

As I said above, wait for the next set of finals in Apr 13 and see how bad things have got. Anybody buying before then is asking for trouble.

[rcturner2] 11/7/2014 18:50

I must have missed when it was strong! I don't remember that lol.

You have pumping this dog for years and it has only ever gone one way, down.

You didn't want to listen to anybody else, including those who clearly knew more about the industry than you.

[hedgehog 100] 11/7/2014 12:51

No, you're a classic hindsight merchant.

You only appear when the share price falls, then disappear when its strong.

It's easy to look clever in hindsight, and with some people that's the only chance they get.

Situations change, and intelligent investors modify their positions accordingly, as I did here.
From the thread "SHFT (SHFT)":

Hedgehog 100 17 Feb'14 - 11:24 - 2383 of 2513 0 0 edit
"... At such a low market cap. there is clearly deep value here.
However, sentiment is on the floor, so the rating is likely to reflect that for a while."


If SHFT does go bust, whoever buys it will I suspect have bought a great business at a bargain price: don't be surprised it relists in the next mining boom at any multiples of its current valuation.

Would you like to make a date to meet back here in ten years?

I would add that the fact that you post in the way you do shows how utterly classless you are.

[lennonsalive] 11/7/2014 12:31

One morning, we will wake and it'll be suspended.

[buywell2] 11/7/2014 08:56

Fist words of common sense yet







Hedgehog 100 10 Jul'14 - 18:03 - 280 of 280 0 0

Sad to see SHFT top of the LSE losers list today, but the five month strike seems to have been 'a straw that is breaking the camel's back' -

Symbol Name Cur % Chg Change News
1 SHFT Shaft Sink 7.13 -46.23% -6.13 1


Price Price Change [%] Bid Offer Open High Low Volume
7.13 -6.125 [-46.23] 6.75 7.50 9.25 9.25 6.50 1,196,277
Market Cap. [m] Shares In Issue [m] Beta EPS DPS PE Ratio Yield 52-Wks-Range
3.38 47.50 0.09 4.14 - 1.72 - 26.25 - 6.50


10/07/2014 07:01 UKREG Shaft Sinkers Holdings Plc Financing Discussions



'Coincidentally', nearly a year to the day since the July 2013 profit warning:

15/07/2013 07:00 UKREG Shaft Sinkers Holdings Plc Trading Update



Perhaps July should be a month in which to be wary of SHFT.













Can't do these any more .... shame that


buywell2 9 Sep'12 - 09:14 - 1306 of 1449 edit







40p retest chartwise could come if support breaks






Which has now become this ....