I've been excited by this one, well at agm's - but noithing seems to prop up their own words. A 4% rise today is noise-level but welcome. What we need is so shiny metal, not pictures of rocks, or forests. This is meant to be a Gold co and all we hear is radio ga-ga.....................

Very likely

Back with a bang.

fingers crossed looking good

Oilyrag I agree and until there is some extracted metal being sold, this is like any other prospect: - jam tomorrow.
It is the reason IMHO why any Placing is likely to be ( NOT ) in PI's favour.
The recent return from suspension caused excitement only amongst the Brokers and MM's who hoped we;d fall over ourselves....

Placing has gone through at 3p plus some warrants,

Quintana gold mine
15,000 ounces of gold a year
Colombian project expected to become operational in six months.

Yes, yes it all looks OK to me on the basis that "if good" it will be very good. PI's can't fund the mining operation; so there has to be a choice - go it alone with some dilution (yes the Warrants are a pain!),
OR
sell the stakes for a pittance, since only proven mines attract a premium.
OR
involve investors, which we are told is "costly" - mainly because the Regulations and hangers-on want to be well-paid.
IF CMR comes good, then we shall reap the rewards of many years gradual build-up.......so that's why I'm sticking with my investment now (currently down a tad), only when they start to come good will I stroke my investment - sure, this means I won't get all the up-side - but it also limits the down-side - if they went under 1p to buy, ( maybe due to floods, etc.).....I might add some more.

CURRENTLY TRADING BELOW THE LAST FLOAT PRICE. 2.88P TO BUY.

2.75P TO BUY.

Is CMR now ( just months after a Fund-raising), asking for more money?
Grief, you'd think they'd just discovered another vein of gold - but no, this new money would appear to be needed to start mining, for real.

Er, I thought CMR was spreading themselves a bit thin - but this is now at sub-atomic levels . . . . .yet the expenses appear to be based on . . . . . acrage perhaps?

I'm turning from being well-satisfied - to rather cross -
(The "spread" is also looking rather terrific.)
Grr.

If further funding is needed then it's unlikely to be at 3p - new investors will want to be sure they aren't diluted within the next year and may be looking at 2p - - so whatever the sp I'm keeping my powder dry. Let's first have some metal-sales!

Agree hangon. Sold 100,000 yesterday @ 2.3p and another 50,000 today @ 2.375.
Still holding 100,000 but well cross like you. I bought at near 5p.
UC.

If Electrum have to buy 50,000's worth of shares at an average of 6p does this mean that the market makers will have to push the price up to this. If so then this is a doubler almost immediately.

Hope so Oily, then I can get out!!
UC.

All this doom is NOT good( although "up" today a tad).

Yet I thought they had staked-out a rather good deal in S.America . . . but as is often the case I have great difficulty creating a Feel-good image of the potential "prospects".

About a year ago I suggested CMR employed a local artist to create a series of drawings of the conditions "now" and how it might change - this would be useful for investors and maybe also help with the "green credentials" of the company in the minds of locals, who naturally fear their land will be destroyed along with their way of life.
Of course, all we got was more digital photos; but frankly they could be anywhere and fail to give me that "insight" that you expect from a real drawing.

I'm still holding and hope that the 5p-level will return, Investors may recall some suggestions were that the "potential" was worth about 25p - possibly less now we've had more dilution ( and some "options" ) - so let's halve that "hoped-for" and look squarely at 12p . . . . . . but when?
Or, should that be "If".

TR-1: Notifications of Major Interests in Shares

1. Identity of the issuer or the underlying issuer of existing Cambridge Mineral Resources plc
shares to which voting rights are attached:

2. Reason for notification (yes/no)
Yes
An acquisition or disposal of voting rights
No
An acquisition or disposal of financial instruments which may result in the acquisition of
shares already issued to which voting rights are attached
No
An event changing the breakdown of voting rights

Other (please specify):______________

3. Full name of person(s) subject to notification Barclays PLC
obligation:

4. Full name of shareholder(s) (if different from 3): Barclays Stockbrokers Ltd

5. Date of transaction (and date on which the 22-Nov-07
threshold is crossed or reached if different):

6. Date on which issuer notified: 23-Nov-07

7. Threshold(s) that is/are crossed or reached: 6% to 7%

8: Notified Details
A: Voting rights attached to shares

Class/type Situation previous to Resulting situation after the triggering transaction
of shares the triggering
If possible transaction
use ISIN
code
Number of Number of Number of Number of voting rights Percentage of voting
shares voting shares rights
rights

Direct Indirect Direct Indirect
GB0001826303 18,423,457 18,423,457 19,329,866 0 19,329,866 0.00 7.13

B: Financial Instruments

Resulting situation after the triggering transaction

Type of financial Expiration date Exercise/ No. of voting rights Percentage of
instrument conversion that may be acquired voting rights
period/date (if the instrument
exercised/converted)

Total (A+B)

Number of voting rights Percentage of voting rights
19,329,866 7.13

9. Chain of controlled undertakings through which the voting rights and /or the financial instruments are
effectively held, if applicable:
Barclays Stockbrokers Ltd

Proxy Voting:

10. Name of proxy holder:

11. Number of voting rights proxy holder will cease
to hold:

12. Date on which proxy holder will cease to hold
voting rights:

13. Additional information:

14 Contact name: Geoff Smith

15. Contact telephone name: 020 7116 2913

Cambridge Mineral Resources Plc

2p-2.25 looks more than careless, this is freefall..... darn!

Merry xmas and happy new year everyone.

yesterdays UK move to nucular power.
Demand for uranium may effect this one with its already proven reserves in Bulgara it looks promising.

mcmahons
Not just this one but VML URA and many other’s it puts uranium back on the agenda.

agree with you both depends on quality of ore Bulgarian deposits proven and used by soviets