Metalnrg Share Discussion Threads

[excellance] 13/5/2021 20:27

Rolf gets paid £170,000 pa for his part time role.

CS gets £12,000

The Arizona project is the only one that interests me, the rest are all chaff. BritNRG will generate a little cash but not enough to pay for Rolf's fuel expenses.

The placing is to raise £2.2m but £500,000 of that or 22% goes straight to the financiers in fees.

The Arizona project is getting £500k spent on it, to bring together core data and geological data from several historical sources in a largely desk based approach.

These will need more funding in another year for drilling and geophysical testing.

[delphi6] 11/5/2021 16:56

All done and dusted - we small PIs don't get a look in.

[delphi6] 11/5/2021 16:54

RNS Prospectus Publication Announcement

MetalNRG plc (LSE: MNRG), the natural resource investing and exploration company, announces the publication of its Prospectus in relation to the admission of a further 443,939,394 Ordinary Shares of 0.01 pence each to listing on the standard segment of the Official List of the FCA and to trading on the Main Market of the London Stock Exchange (together, the "Admission").
443,939,394 @ 0.6p with warrants @ 1p. = 40% of new share capital!!.

[excellance] 06/4/2021 14:28

Up 16% bouncing from a silly low.

[excellance] 06/4/2021 11:36

Looking perky today.

[burtond1] 01/4/2021 07:19

A Glittering 18 months ahead for @MetalNRGplc "...My drive over the next 12-18 months is very much on getting the market cap of #MNRG up, up, up..."Here, CEO Rolf Gerritsen catches up with @copytaster and expands on recent transactions and much more...https://total-market-solutions.com/2021/04/metalnrg/

[harrisun] 24/3/2021 09:25

Deals are done for a reason, and the only reason I can think for doing the gasification deal might not be as strange as I first perceived.

It may indicate that MetalNRG is going to fundamentally change. It was suggested at some stage that a link with EUA may occur, and that might be the case, but perhaps in a different way to what we originally thought.

To go to gasification is such a fundamental change of direction, that just perhaps it will end up with TWO companies, one either acquired by another for its resource or variations of it, leaving a brand new direction for the resultant company where a name change would occur.

Otherwise just can't see the logic of gasification and resources mix.

[harrisun] 23/3/2021 09:12

Excellence the problems with burning rubbish are great though, even at high temperatures furans and dioxins are emitted. Although gasification doesn't burn the rubbish through combustion, its temperatures only reach 700C which is not enough to destroy some dangerous components such as dioxins via Polychlorinated dibenzodioxins and to get over this we hear the double speak term 'emitted within acceptable levels' which often means emitted without check.

Even in the UK we had a situation where an incinerator was producing emissions absolutely toxic even though it was given the 'state of the art' label, and where often plant replacing failed plant is described that way, ironically no different to the original plant that produced toxic waste. This applies to nuclear too.

With regard to incineration though, these plants that could not be tested or operated safely had politicians at local and government level do what they do best...Change the name.

That is why in most cases we no longer have plant described as incinerators....they are energy from waste, but produce the same toxic result and a massive nett energy loss when often the plastics are taken into consideration.

Once public opinion turns or something fails, they just change the name to something else as if its a completely safe system. The waste disposal problem will always be there and especially when governments the world over leave it to consumers to dictate the ultimate fate of their products, rather than have it manufactured in a safer manner to start with and where hydrocarbons are often blamed, but where we've had the production capability for safer plastics for decades.

Even with food waste, we had a really good system in the UK.....where food waste was collected and became pig swill with pigs able to consume even brain matter with apparent impunity, yet this was stopped and instead we fed brain protein to herbivore ruminants the obvious disaster waiting to happen.

In the case of incinerators, the tests to keep them within safety limits were never able to be properly made because the toxicity in 'hot spots' was such it was dangerous to even test, and the same is probably true with gasification. This meant inspectors having the tasks to ensure safe operation had to nod these plants through.

Sadly Einstein's conservation of mass is at work her too, but some of the more toxic elements need a temperature of thousands of degrees to change their state from their toxic one, and where these temperatures are seldom achieved. Even the ash, often used for building can have high furan/dioxin content.

In most processes including incineration, there may be downtime/startup if not 24/7 operation, and inevitably temperatures fluctuate. Sad too that in the case of incinerators as opposed to gasification, to assist combustion temperatures PLASTICS is to be included to help fuel the combustion process because of its highly combustible nature and energy content of 35Mj/Kg, even if it has been separated for recycling. So there is an incentive then to keep burning plastics producing even more toxic emissions.

NtTPS://www.intechopen.com/online-first/dioxin-and-furan-emissions-from-gasification

[32campomar] 22/3/2021 22:38

Oil wells, potential gold prospecting in Arizona & now Eqtec green tie up. Jack of all trades and master of none springs to mind.

[excellance] 22/3/2021 19:33

Maybe mnrg hope to use waste products from oil and gas to generate electricity to power EV charging stations?

[excellance] 22/3/2021 19:27

Burning rubbish as a fuel isn't a new idea, but gasification is.

Waste disposal is a huge problem, so compacting and burning off its energy to reuse in factories or towns is a great idea.

What mnrg can bring to the EQTEC table is a mystery to me.

[harrisun] 22/3/2021 19:01

I must agree if I wanted to invest in EQTEC I would buy shares and it does not seem a good fit with a resource company which is where big bucks are to be made.

Gasification? Its not really a technology that seems to be going anywhere? Biomass received a lot of bad press when it was found that most of it had to be imported, some from as far away as the USA.

Seems a bit desperate

[ark87] 22/3/2021 13:33

I think MNRG will have a £50m+ mcap at some point but question is will shareholders see much of it after endless dilutions?

[excellance] 22/3/2021 12:58

I'm hoping that the end game is to explore the gold ridge mine and connect it to the other mines using modern technology, prove up a huge resource.

Meanwhile, we've got no money, so duck and dive to weave a cash flow from wherever we can, proper spivs, dealing in all kinds of junk to finance gold ridge.

We lost momentum with the failed Romanian oil deal, and in lake Victoria gold, and we've now got convertible loan notes, options, warrants, but now £2.3m in the bank.

Still a copper asset to IPO and now a new fangle green energy business to rake commissions.

I like EQTEC but if I want them I'll buy direct.

[excellance] 22/3/2021 12:44

Didn't they get their shares in exchange for their loan notes?

[lew stules] 22/3/2021 12:24

That's a bit harsh Ex, it's how all small mining/exploration companies survive.

EUA had to do the same and look where they are now.
What intrigues me is the two private investors who now own about 17% of the shares and continue to increase their holdings.
What do they know that we don't?

[excellance] 22/3/2021 11:42

Oh dear.

So our only revenue comes from hydrocarbons from a deal made just months ago, and now we are setting ourselves up as some kind of green champion...with a gold mine in Arizona.

Hotch potch company that plans to grow by issuing shares like confetti.

[ark87] 22/3/2021 11:19

Wowzer's... What do we make of today's RNS then? First thoughts are very positive longterm but of course more dilution will be needed?

"EQTEC and MetalNRG will work in partnership on investments, with EQTEC advising technically, financially, and operationally, becoming MetalNRG's preferred technology partner for Green Energy Projects.

The focus will be on "shovel ready" projects, that meet the Company's existing investment criteria, are sited in the UK and Europe, will have a CAPEX investment of between £5 million to £15 million, can be financed by a combination of debt and equity and will deliver revenues within 18 months of transaction close and have a minimum unlevered IRR of 11%"

[excellance] 17/3/2021 22:27

Yes, well a while back I whinged on about how MNRG didn't have the cash to do anything, then they went into the oil industry, and went off looking at lake Victoria, which I'm pleased to say was a no go venture.

Now they have the money, but does CS have the time.

The key word for Arizona is "connectivity", find that and BOOM!

[cbeadle] 17/3/2021 22:22

This asset in Arizona could be huge. It’s close to the famous Bisbee which operated for 50+ years. Liberty Star are exploring Hay Mountain, their former CEO James Briscoe was instrumental in advising Northern Dynasty to discover the Pebble Prospect.

[harrisun] 17/3/2021 10:58

You have to own the shares in order to be able to put them in the bottom drawer

[ark87] 17/3/2021 10:29

Wow... Engineer a rise to suck in momentum/chart breakout/fomo traders and then big ol' placing. 0.6-1p trading rage for 6 months now back in the bottom draw.

[harrisun] 17/3/2021 09:13

Do give example
Then compare it with the majority of placings, where you can see forward selling on a cascading downward share price often starting weeks ahead to set the placing price based on the dropped share price level, safe in the knowledge you have secured the shares at a knocked down placing price.

Look its annoying to see sp, its annoying the discount, but it will pick itself up if the company has merit.

Manipulation on AIM certainly, but it would be a bit blatant to suggest they can push price up by over 50% and still find the buyers for what would be considerable numbers of shares and any forward runner would have had to have sold yesterday to realise any decent profit, and that requires similar number of buyers for millions and millions of shares.