NML is due its interrim results now, last year it was the 28th of this month.

They are setting up a new site to explore/research/analyse and all the equipment to do this should be on site now, and drilling should start soon, all this extra news should be covered in the interims.

does anyone have any further positive views on this company ??

Just recently I heard some pretty shockingly good news about the company. I can repeat it because it wasn't told in confidence, and it was good enough that I've had to share it with both sets of bullitin boards. It may turn out to be already known, but then the context of the news was such that it made me extremely excited about NML.

Here it is:

notready - 9 Jun'05 - 10:28 - 1537 of 1537


I have some fantastic news about NML!!!!!

1. They have started alluvial mining operations.
2. The known resource is huge. Unmapped resource is probably massive.
3. The company have brought forward their kimberlite mapping because of demand from several potential partners.
4. The directors have share options that start at 8p and have share price targets from 16p to 55p by April 2007, only 20 months away.
5. The potential profits and cash flow are very large from alluvials alone.
6. The potential profits from kimberlites could be huge.
7. They also have a free interest in a promising diamond prospect in Greenland.
8. The market cap is a ridiculous 6m.

Please tell everyone, including the regulators, because I don't think the market has cottoned on yet!!!!

PS. On the negative side there is some confusion in reconciling old and new directors holding notices and there was a bit of a delay to minestart due to bad weather. Big deal!

mjr
What an interesting post. There is also the possibility of a take-over from a major, once their resources are proven.

Mjr...don't worry about Anomalous1 he is a well known deramper on NML advfn thread. It can't be long now before we have some good news to push NML upwards.
Di

Cheers Dynamite, takahe.

Fingers crossed!

nice one mjr (in confidence to both you and Dynamite, of course!) - lol.

Tell me, Oh Anomalous One, when dey find de diamonds do dey pull dem up DE RAMP or use de bucket and de rope?

sd

What a laugh I've had today, reading through all your posts. You obviously have a problem with the truth. I suspect that the reason why the majority of posters have not filtered me, is because they know (secretly) that the realism I have been posting is the truth.

You were all very quick to rubbish the 4p price when I predicted it, but it isn't so funny now. You were all quick to rubbish the predictions that the company would have to carry out dilutions. You kept of claiming that they had more than enough, what with the placing and the convertible drawdown - but they've had to dilute since then... and more than once. I even predicted that they would not be able to start in February as they promised and they didn't..

and yet the posters on this board still blindly support their company, refusing to accept that anything is wrong, when the mystery seller keeps dumping quantities of shares and the directors can't even get their declarations correct.

How many other companies do you know that are under investigation for breaches of the directors declaration regulations?...

Why are you ignoring the alarm bells that are ringing in your head? The market hears them. The mystery seller hears them. That's why the share price has been artificially depressed. And yet you still have 'faith' in the management. A management that was called 'incompetent' by one of your own 'experts'.

I'm glad that there are people like you out there. You see the Market Makers need fools like you to keep the market going. Otherwise they wouldn't be able to give the stuff away! The majority of posters on this board are examples that prove PT Barnum was right!

And a good thing too. The sharks out there need someone gullible enough to sell their dodgey secondhand cars to. If Darwin was here, he would say that you've put yourselves up for natural De-selection!

That's the trouble with these posters, they don't understand that in order not to be taken advantage of, you need to keep an open mind and look at all the alternative theories, not lock yourself into one mindset.

The vast majority of posters on this board are upset because they are get rich quick merchants. There are a few exceptions like notready, Ianwc and Wdurham, but the rest were definitely expecting to be rich (on paper) last October. You only have to read back through the other threads to see all your talk of:

"The news is on the way".... "only a short time now and the SP will rocket"... "They are pulling diamonds up by the handfull"... You only have to dig down one metre and there are loads of them"...

The company kept on promising results but has so far failed to deliver. You all moan about the share price being low or the market cap being a third or a quarter of what it should be, but fail to realise that the company has so far delivered nothing of value.

In fact, the only thing the company has done is take more money and de-value your shares, most likely because they couldn't own up to the fact that they couldn't get their figures right.

Those of you that went to the meeting came back and wrote what John Cross and Shane Healey told you. Don't you recall that they said there was no further need for dilutions? Don't you recall that they said they would start the mine in February? Don't you recall that they told you they would have 5,000 carats in 2 weeks? Don't you recall that they said they would come back to the UK and report to the shareholders?

The simple fact is, that the market has noticed these broken promises, even if you refuse to.... and that is why the price of the share has not risen. Because the seller keeps selling and the MMs will not move the price except with solid proof. Even if they do move the price, they are well aware that the seller will re-appear and dump another load.

The company would have to report some pretty spectacular news in order to move the price and so far, they've kept remarkedly silent. Despite all the emails to the directors, they are keeping quiet. Why?, well probably because they know that they should not have been communicating with the shareholders so freely last year. IMO someone from Canary Wharf had a word with the directors and reminded them that illicit emails would not only be against the rules of the exchange, but against the law.

Haven't you wondered why there's been no broker's notes about NML yet? Aren't you in the least bit curious as to why the institutionals have not taken an interest?

You all claim that NML is below their radar. That it is tremendous value, but not been noticed. What utter crap. Of course NML has been noticed. How many other firms had AFX's that talked about death threats (apart from the Glazers!)?

The institutionals are not interested, because they know how much risk there is. They know that someone's been selling vast amounts of shares for over a year now, and it says that these people have no confidence in the company.

If NML was such a good buy with such good prospects and potential, then the share price should have gone through the roof. The reason it hasn't is because the management has failed to deliver and the mystery seller keeps dumping. So no wonder the institutionals are avoiding it. They want to see proof that there are diamonds there before they invest any wedge.

So the posters on this board claim... what about the proven resource?

Sure there is a proven resource, all 188,100 recoverable carats of it. But haven't you twigged to something yet? 188,100 carats will take them a year and a half, just 18 months to mine at 10,000 carats a month. So the proven recoverable resource is worth $6.75 million for NML's share (according to WDurham's figures). The company is only worth $13.5 million at the moment.

Most of you would then say, But what about the other areas, the other deposits that they've found. Well if you bother to check the Project Summary, you'll see that the company puts a probability figure against each of the resources:



So you can see for yourself, that the company thinks there is only (at best) a 40% probability of finding the diamonds in the 5 Rio Lapi targets and a 20% chance for the Rio Chicapa targets. Institutionals need a better chance than that for them to be able to invest. That's one of the reasons they have avoided NML, apart from the selling. They've been smart enough to realise that NML needs to breakout above 7p before they can see any potential for the company.

Then you might say "What about the kimberlite pipes?"...

There are 3 kimberlites on the concession, but they don't belong to NML yet. Given that Catoca has been mining for some time (and successfully) I would have thought that they stood more chance of taking these pipes. Or maybe even the majors that inspected the pipes sometime ago, like DB or BHP. Endiama is going to award the license to the people they trust to bring in the goodies. Catoca has proven capable of this. They have the funds and they have the desire to expand their operation. They are obviously well situated. 20 to 25 kilometres is nothing in distance. They could easily ship the ore down the road to the Catoca plant and wouldn't need to build one on site. It seems to me (and probably the institutionals too) that Catoca stands the best chance of getting the license. They could provide Endiama with 'jam today', rather than 'jam tomorrow'. It would take NML more than 3 years to get the pipe operation underway

NML has aplied for the license. They've managed to dilute to get some funding, purportedly to do some research on the kimberlites, but it will take a great deal more money than 500,000 to complete the bulk sample and the BFS. Look at DB, they've invested $millions into AK6 to rush that to production and AK6 is not expected to be on-line for 4 to 5 years at best. Catoca could have the bulk sample and BFS completed in a year, or two at most. They don't need to build a plant, they already have one.

So it's understandable that the Institutionals don't want to take a risk on NML. The value of the proven resource is not worth their while and there is still a huge risk that NML will not get the kimberlites or find any diamonds of economic quantities in the other targets.

If the company states that the probability of success is 40%, then the cup is less than half-full, not a cup half-empty. So it's understandable why the price of NML keeps deteriorating. Despite the claims by the management that they are operating and extracting, the market wants to see proof. And even then, the price of NML is not likely to sky rocket on the news. Bceause there is so much uncertainty that they will be able to keep operating after 18 months.

I'm not disputing that there are diamonds in the proven area. Dr Smith's report states that there is and his credentials are not in doubt.

What is in doubt is the ability of a management that has been described as incompetent to do the job they said they would do. They've let the shareholder down so many times in the past, that their credibility with the market is very low. You may choose to believe them, but the market doesn't. Hence the current price.

If you want to blind yourself to the risks of this project, then that is your choice. However, don't go bitching when the truth comes back to hurt you. Don't complain that the share price hasn't risen as it should have. Don't then try to get 'revenge' by trying to trash other BBs when your own company has let you down.

If you can't face the truth, then you are deluding yourself. You can dream about all the riches you will earn in your imaginery world, but it's unlikely that the Share Price of NML will deliver these.

If you would keep an open mind, you would realise that the market has a different view of NML and it is the market that decides the price of the share.

Anomalous1 - 09 Jun'05 - 12:43 - 714 of 714 (Filtered)

Congratulations you are the first and only poster in my filter list.

LOL!

Sd :-)
Anomalous...you mustbe a paid deramper or else you would not bother spouting long winded rubbish. You cannot even get a CFD to short NML so what is teh point of your posts?? Being paid to do it is the only one I can think of. And no I haven't bothered to read what you have written as I don't bother on advfn either. You might as well go back to their boards,... they are more interested in arguing with you.
We are not

Unfortunately guys, I think he points out some good things.

As i have said, i once held this falling into the trap of empty promises. If NML do pluck out all these diamonds and are as cash generative as they say they will be then I will be the first person on here to congratulate those who have stuck through this.

I hope it goes well for you.

Anomolous obviously knows people close to the company - and doesn't hold any shares!! I don't think he is short selling them - because of the spread it would be hard to make any money on them plus the mkt cap is very low, so he has no reason to deramp the shares for personal gain. Perhaps people should at least take on board some of his thoughts.

BY THE WAY.. THANKS EVERYONE FOR REPLYING TO MY QUESTIONS. MUCH APPRECIATED.

Its clear Anomalous has held NML shares in the past, like yourself, and has sold, probably at a heavy loss, because he wasn't patient enough.

He may now regret selling out and wishes he had held on that bit longer.

He may feel a lot of bitterness towards NML Directors because things didn't turn out exactly how he believed they would at exactly the time he believed they would.

He certainly will regret not holding it in a few months time IMO.

mjr1234 -

That's largely because how he believed "things would turn out" was based on misunderstandings, misconceptions and a tendency to twist what he heard/read to suit his desired outcome. You ought to see if you can find his "NML will be producing 20k carats a month from day one because they are going to use a barge to mine both sides of the river at once!" theory. Laugh a minute, that one, but he would not be talked out of it, and continued to present it as "fact". His chagrin when - surprise, surprise - they were found to be doing no such thing was huge - even though the whole theory was preposterous.

Wendy,

I don't think Anom was the source of the "barge" rumour!

Good to see you on here, why not start a TDM thread?
BTW are you going to Bedwas next week?

There is a PM facility here as well, if you set up an email address.

Andy -

He was definitely the source of the emphatic statement that a "barge" meant double production from day one - i.e. 20k carats per month, mined from both sides of the river by a plant situated on a barge in the middle. Think about what you know of alluvial mining - it's a ludicrous proposition to start with, even if you are dredging! I quote:

"Anomalous - 6 Oct'04 - 00:04 - 3999 of 5103

< <>>>

The Project Summary gave the extraction figure of 675 cubic metres of ore per 10 hour shift. However, we know that they intend to mine both sides of the river simultaneously during the day and run the processing plant 20 hours a day in two shifts. This means that the extraction would be 1,350 cubic metres a day. All moved in 25 to 35 tonne 6-wheeled trucks."
-------------------------

Now - we KNEW no such thing. Anom had merely mis-interpreted a telephone conversation that was reported to him some weeks after it actually occurred, by someone who didn't understand what he was being told by someone who at the time knew damn all about alluvial mining.

I queried this assumption, which Anom treated as FACT, based on what he said were DECISIONS made by the company, on a number of occasions. This was one of the replies I got:

"Anomalous - 18 Oct'04 - 10:49 - 4655 of 5103

< <>>>

The information on the increased mining came from two sources. The first was the website and the second was the Project Summary.

If you check the figures on the website:
http://www.new-millennium.com.au/ang_resources.php
They show that the original estimated extraction was 120,000 carats per year. Increasing to 240,000 carats after 5 months.

"The project financial model is detailed within this report. Initial production of diamonds will be annualised at 120,000 carats increasing to 240,000 carats five (5) months after operations commence, yielding a profit of US$ 110 per carat rising to US$124 per carat with the increased production. The recoverable reserve of 188,100 carats of diamonds identified in the Rio Lapi Garimpo should thus yield approximately US$ 20 million."

The Project Summary:
http://www.new-millennium.com.au/download/Info%20Memo%20for%20Valuation%20Report%2014May04.pdf
gave a figure of 247,163 carats per year. This corresponds with them mining both sides of the river.

There is other evidence as well in the quantities of ore being mined. The figures could not be supported by mining one side of the river at a time. They had to be mining both sides. The other sources corroberated this, so it stands to reason that they were intending to mine both sides from the start. It makes perfect sense to do so.

Security becomes more difficult outside daylight hours. So it makes sense to work the trucks to build up a ore pile, for processing during daylight hours, to guard the pile under lighting during night time, as it is being processed and have the trucks remove the tailings and waste, which don't need to be watched so carefully. I am completely happy that this is the true state of affairs."
-------------------------------------

So - Anom is happy. In spite of the fact that as yet he clearly has no idea of how an alluvial operation actually operates. So it becomes FACT.

I queried it AGAIN, as follows, and got another reply:

"wdurham - 19 Oct'04 - 17:49 - 4852 of 5103 edit

< <>>>

Anom - are you sure about this "both sides" business? After all, a diamond plant can handle gravels drawn from a 360 degree circle around it if it likes, let alone stuff from just either side of it. You seem confident, based on this concept, that initial production will be double that originally planned - but if your theory is correct, that means double the number of lorries and double the number of gravel excavators, with all the drivers concentrated into one shift instead of two. The double shift was not planned to come into operation for 5-6 months in any case, and would, of course, use the same mobile plant as the single shift. It truly doesn't make sense to me to spend a whole lot of dosh on more mobile plant at this stage. I can see the logic of putting the plant on the river - no nasty floods to stop operation during the rainy season - but have you taken note of the sheer size of the alluvial plain? And thought about the variability of the width of the Lapi in the first place?


Anomalous - 19 Oct'04 - 19:52 - 4858 of 5103


>Wendy
I believe my info on mining both sides is 100% correct. They originally planned to start just one side. When it was decided to mount the processing plant on the barge, they said "What the hell" and decided it would be easier to hit full production right away, by doing both sides of the river at the same time. That way they can keep tight security on the ore pile feeding the processor.

Night-time is their worst enemy. Once the ore is exposed, the artisan miners (and some of the staff) will be in for the quick kill. It would be pretty easy to spot a few on the bed surface. The idea to mine both sides simultaneously, cut down on the security problems and build up a reasonably large stockpile to keep the plant fed at full speed."
----------------------------------

I put it to you that Anom knew NOTHING of the company's "plans" and certainly nothing of what he calls their "decisions". What he has stated immediately above is utter and complete rubbish, mainly because the company had no such plans, and took no such decisions! He merely took a piece of misunderstood hearsay and twisted it to suit what he wanted to hear and interpreted it to fit HIS view of the situation.

His views now are very different of course, but his methodology has not changed. Take some "evidence" (never mind whether its right), interpret it (never mind whether the interpretation is even logical, let alone achievable) and use it to present a FACTUAL view which is often preposterous rubbish and sometimes no more than wishful thinking. He was EXACTLY the same on CDG. Lack of knowledge = misinterpretation of what he is told = rubbish posted on BBs. Ask Rolandp!

Trouble is, he is so authoritative and persuasive that those who have not looked in any depth at the company believe him. Which is PRECISELY his intention.

Sorry this is such a long post - but you did throw down the gauntlet, and MoneyAM posters need to know the "other side" of the apparently knowlegeable and all-seeing, all-knowing Anomalous.

P.S. Been here since Day 1 though I haven't posted for ages. Starting a TDM thread here is the fastest way to self-immolation I can think of. No, I am not going to Bedwas next week - although I have the promise of a visit in the near future.

P.P.S. Have you seen the latest 3DM patent applications listed in the Patent Office Journal published on 8th June? They make interesting reading.

Wendy - thanks for your views. Anomalous seems well-named, although a normal arse only needs scratching when it itches, IMHO, not every minute of the day - so, a further discrepancy! lol.

sd

Wendy,

Ok fair enough, you are correct.

OFF topic

I see TDM as a PDX type of company, and a terrific solution to disposing of the world's plastic waste products, there should be a thread here IMO.

Ok will look out for the journal, thanks.

Wendy
A brilliant resume of that incident..thanks

Andy, if you really think there should be a thread on TDM, I will see what I can do. But it is a stock fraught with all the usual, unfortunately.

It doesn't just have similarities with PDX, but also with BPRG, PRM, TRK - the business model is the licensing of intellectual property. PDX and to a lesser extent, TDM have had to modify that slightly, but the basic premise is very similar.

Wendy D - 09 Jun'05 - 18:19 - 721 of 725
He was definitely the source of the emphatic statement that a "barge" meant double production from day one - i.e. 20k carats per month, mined from both sides of the river by a plant situated on a barge in the middle. Think about what you know of alluvial mining - it's a ludicrous proposition to start with, even if you are dredging!

Absolute Rubbish by Wendy D She knows full well who was the ultimate source of the stories about the barge and I pointed this out to her on the ADVFN thread.
The source of the rumour was none other than Shane Healey, NML's finance director
The information on the barge was passed by him in a telephone call to one of the shareholders. That shareholder then passed the information to others in the Group. Shane Healey represents NML, regardless of the fact that Wendy calls him a bean-counter. I was told by Gunnergonk (another ADVFN poster) tht he spoke with Shane Healey and was passed this information. Shane had no right to put out stories such as the barge if the information was incorrect. I had no reason to believe that the information Gunnergonk gave me was incorrect and I know that Wendy D knew about the information coming from Shane too.

Wendy D has deliberately withheld stating who originated the barge information and the 'mining both sides' story as she knows that it proves my point. An NML director was the source of the information (according to Gunnergonk) and Wendy believed this was true too. I can prove that Wendy knew about it, because I have an email from her in which she mentions it:

From: Wendy D
Sent: 01 November 2004 15:34
To: 'Anomalous'
Subject: RE: skjimey

I have always been suspicious of the Healey emails. Shane is an accountant, not a geo nor a mining engineer. I have been baffled by the content of some of his notes, as they just don't make sense. This business of "mining both sides" is a case in point.

Important to remember, too, that all those emails were solicited by shareholders. Naturally one would expect honesty in any reply, but it just goes to show that the more you badger them, the more likely you are to get information which is misleading and can very easily be misunderstood.

I do not believe these people are crooks, though. They would be hardly likely to organise a meeting for shareholders if they expected to be lynched for lying before the evening was over. Similarly, no company director would be stupid enough to put misleading information "on paper" - as it were - to shareholders.

Thursday should make a number of things clear.

-----Original Message-----
From: Anomalous
Sent: 01 November 2004 15:18
To: 'Wendy D
Subject: RE: skjimey
Importance: High

Hi Wendy

Yes I saw that, but I let it pass, because I didn't want another war to break out of "you know something, so you should post it".

I'm very concerned about NML. Although Gunner and I spoke about it over the weekend, it is possible that the directors were leading us up the garden path in a pump and dump operation. If this is the truth, I doubt that they will be allowed to leave the country as people will be anxious to pass some of Shane Healey's 'emails' to the FSA. I just hope that they are intent on releasing another RNS, otherwise it could get very messy.

Best Regards
_____

Anomalous
Co-ordinator
RSV Shareholders Action Group


-----Original Message-----
From: Wendy D
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 3:06 PM
To: 'Anomalous'
Subject: skjimey


I note that he has posted a hint about the new grades for the AK6 and BK11 kimberlites - he has said all along that he knows the grades, for some weeks now.

X.xx cpcm - very interesting, and much better than the historic Debswana figures provided by Leon.

So you can see for yourself that the whole issue of the barge and mining both sides was known by Wendy D and that the information originated with the directors of NML.

So you have to ask yourself why Wendy tried to deceive you in post 721. Wendy D has been embarassed on the ADVFN BB, because it was through her refusal to accept incontravertible information, that the directors had failed to declare their holdings, that the directors are now under investigation by the AIM Regulatory Department for non-compliance with Directors Declarations Rules.

She attacked me in a similar post on the ADVFN BB and this was my reply:



Yet another load of trash from WDurham. Does she realise that the people she is attacking in this post is non other than NML's Finance Director - Shane Healey - a mere bean counter by WDurham's own estimate.

wdurham - 9 Jun'05 - 18:49 - 1589 of 1590
Not quite fair, Campbell.
I am sure he tells the truth as he sees it. He only presents FACTS after all. Or what he tells us are FACTS - though they are often only the product of his imagination.
And I quote:
"Anomalous - 19 Oct'04 - 19:52 - 4858 of 5103
>Wendy
I believe my info on mining both sides is 100% correct. They originally planned to start just one side. When it was decided to mount the processing plant on the barge, they said "What the hell" and decided it would be easier to hit full production right away, by doing both sides of the river at the same time. That way they can keep tight security on the ore pile feeding the processor.
Night-time is their worst enemy. Once the ore is exposed, the artisan miners (and some of the staff) will be in for the quick kill. It would be pretty easy to spot a few on the bed surface. The idea to mine both sides simultaneously, cut down on the security problems and build up a reasonably large stockpile to keep the plant fed at full speed."
NOW, folks - does anyone recall the company planning to start "just one side" of the Rio Lapi? Does anyone recall the company saying "What the hell!" and deciding to hit full production (20k carats per month - although this is not stated in this particular post) right away by mining both sides of the Rio Lapi? Does anyone recall the company saying they would be operating a double shift right from the start, and buying loads more excavators and bulldozers and lorries to do it with?
Course you don't!
It's all a figment of Anom's extremely fertile imagination, based on his incorrect interpretation of a conversation reported to him some weeks after the event by someone who didn't understand fully what someone else who knew damn all about alluvial mining was talking about as a possible option. And even after being challenged a number of times, he stuck to his FACTS - which later proved to be simple garbage. And was he angry? Goodness, the screen flamed with his total indignance when he learned that his carefully constructed house of cards was based on nothing more than his imagination - there was no barge! The righteous rage was incandescent.
We knew the idea was preposterous all along, of course. But there you go - that's Anomalous for you.

The lies about the barge were passed to none other than Gunnergonk, who then propagated them around the group. Even you (in an email) admitted that you had heard about the barge story and didn't believe it. Yet Gunner swore that Shane told him about the barge. It was only when we found out that the story was a fabrication, a lie that was passed to Gunner, that we realised the company had been fabricating quite a few stories.

Even csmyth was at it. In his posts he stated the company was operating on 1st November he wrote:

"People are getting too wound up about the difference between exploitation and exploration. Nobody has been issued an exploitation permit in Angola yet at all, including Petra. This doesnt mean that companies cant mine diamonds though (Petra obviously is). NML is commissioning their plant and will ramp up to expected capacity in the next few months (which is normal mining operation procedure). They have recovered diamonds and this will result in cash flow for them. I have every confidence that John Cross will produce to the throughput specified in the technical summary (20000 carats per month)."

Yet 6 months later and they still hadn't started the mine. He also said:

"So far, NML has got the equipment on site, it is operating, and they will ramp up."

6 months to ramp up production? - what sort of Mickey Mouse outfit is this?! Even Walt Disney could do better than this and he's dead!

The company has told one fib after another to placate the anxious shareholders. The recent news I heard makes me believe they are still up to their old tricks. I'm not going to say any more, but the smarter ones (if there are any in NML) will be able to work out what I heard.

The simple fact is that the company has been feeding stories to the shareholders to convince them that nothing is wrong, when in actual fact the management continues to be incompetent.

Where are the NML broker notes?

Where are the NML Institutional Investors -

Oh Yes - THEY CAN'T GET ANY!!!

No-one can forget the biggest story, the one put about by Shane Healey.

"The diamonds are only one metre down"

and

"You can pull handfulls of them"

and

"We're going for it from the start"

At least when I found out that they had been telling fibs I called them for what they were. At least when I found out they were not going to start of schedule I warned everyone. At least when I noticed the share price would go to 4p, I warned everyone. At least when I saw that more dilutions were on the way, I said so, the NML management didn't. They had you all believing them at that meeting when they said they had enough funding.

WDurham is a case in point about believing that nothing is wrong. Thanks to her, the directors of the company are now facing an AIM investigation into their dealings. If WDurham had accepted the in-controvertible data that we had in March, then I wouldn't have had to contact AIM (in exasperation) to prove conclusively that there were discrepancies. I tried to warn the directors, through one of the regular posters. Three times I asked her to contact the directors and get their house in order. But she did nothing. So it's not surprising that WDurham provoked an investigation that could result in a rather large fine for the directors. I just hope that she feels responsible enough to pay the fine on their behalf, rather than hide on this bulletin board, fooling the other regulars that nothing is wrong with the company.

You should be ashamed of yourself Wendy.

At least I had the courage to admit that I had believed the lies told by the company. They had fooled me good and proper with the stories. They fooled Gunner too. The poor guy couldn't afford to lose money in that way.

The company had put out these false stories and false claims about when they would start operations and some of their 'henchmen' like csmyth have helped perpetuate the story by saying they would be operating in a few months. 6 months later - still nothing. So I've looked at the company data and checked their statements and found that the company did make poor estimates. My estimates were better. The share price did reach 4p. They did dilute. They didn't start in February.

So keep on supporting the company the way you are WDurham, because when this all goes pear shaped because the share price does not get above 8p, don't say I didn't warn you. The rest of the NMLers believe your 'authoritive' posts, but the Minmet people don't. They know you better than that.



So you can see, Wendy D has a bit of a reputation. The Minmet shareholders remember her quite well and not fondly at all. Many of them feel that she led them down the garden path with her support for Minmet. Even Wendy admits that she's had to pay quite a price for her mistakes there.

I had no reason to doubt the information passed to me by Gunnergonk. He said that it was from Shane. I checked the Project Summary and the company releases to see if they corroberated the data and the statements - they did.

It was only in early November 2004, that we finally found out that the directors had misled us very seriously. In questioning someone who works for NML, I found out that there was no barge, no mining both sides and most importantly of all - the company had not started the mine as thy had promised.

Shane Healey had repeatedly stated that they were:

"Going for it from the start"

He was asked about this and he said that they meant to start mining immediately they arrived at the mine site and at full speed. Not working up to full potential as is the normal practise. As I pointed out, Shane Healey is a director of NML. When he makes a statement, he is making it on behalf of the company as a whole. Yet as Wendy has stated, the statement does not tie in with normal mining practise for alluvial operations. Shane is (by her own words):
"A mere bean-counter"
Yet this bean=counter is a director of an alluvial diamond mining company and making statements about their operations - of which he knows next to nothing about.

The Operational Directors, Shane Healey and John Cross, came to a meeting in November 2004 in London. The people that attended this meeting came away afterwards and told us what they said. They said:

1. They would be operating the mine by February 2005

2. They would not need any further finance (from dilutions) as they had all the funds they needed from the placing and the convertible drawdown.

3. That they would be able to recover the first 5,000 carats in about 2 weeks after start up.

ALL THREE of these statements have turned out to be false.

1. It took until April to start the mine. Not 4 months but 6 months after the statement and a full 12 months after the original planned start date.

2. They have so far carried out TWO major dilutions since that statement about the funds. The first time to the Badenhorsts, to convert the cash payment into shares (because the company obviously had too little working capital) and to the directors, to convert their fees. The second time, they raised 500,000 purportedly so they can explore the kimberlites. Yet the data suggests that the company has had absolutely no revenue from their operations, so they needed some extra funds. By their own admission, they are using $400k per month during mining and have been operating for close to two and a half months now. That's a good $1 million used up with no visible revenue. If they had received revenue, they haven't stated so and they should have declared this price sensitive information.

3. Even this statement seemed at odds with all the project data, as they would have needed to have been operating at full exploitation rate to find 5,000 carats in that timescale. All the data suggests a work up with 3,000 carats in the first month, 6,000 in the second and 10,000 in the third. The management have made no announcement to state that they have reached this goal of 5,000 carats at all. They have recovered some diamonds, but from the data they supplied it was very little, and the quantity of fresh ore used could not be determined as they only mentioned 'ore concentrate'. Something completely different.

So you can see, that the management have even failed to complete the targets they talked about in their presentation meeting.

What's more, there's one other goal they set that they may also fail to achieve. They said that they would be cashflow neutral by the end of June 2005. To be cashflow neutral, they would need revenue (which they have not announced) and they would need more than is being spent ($400k per month). In fact, strictly speaking to be cashflow neutral for 2005, they would need to have obtained revenue equal to the entire amount spent on the operations for year ending June 2005. Something that is highly unlikely.

They've even failed to obtain any brokers notes or attract any institutional support for NML. One of the reasons is more than likely because the project only represents a revenue of $6.75 million for the first 18 months with the possibility that there will be NONE afterwards. What Instituitional investor would trust a company, where there is any liklihood that the company will be without a revenue stream 18 months after start?

It's obvious, the 'big boys' are not interested in NML whilst they only have a 40% chance (or less) of bringing in the other areas on the known data at present. Even the kimberlites are by no means certain and Catoca stands a much better chance at getting the license than NML do, because Catoca is already operating a huge Kimberlite processing plant 20-25 km down the road. In Endiama want the NML kimberlites brought into production as early as possible (so that Endiama can get the revenue) then they would be better off handing the C9 kimberlites to Catoca. Until the matter of the C9 Kimberlite licenses is resolved, I very much doubt that NML will get anything in the way of institutional support.

So you can see for yourself, that Wendy D was deceiving you with her stories about me. She was leaving out important information about who originated these stories about the barges and mining both sides. It might be a good idea to find out why she wanted you to believe that I created them, when I did not. Could it be that she is just vindictive towards me, or maybe that she was embarassed by getting the NML directors in trouble. I tried three times to get the NML directors to sort their own problem out. But Wendy denied that there was a problem and got them into trouble as a consequence.

Why is she deceiving you? Your guess on this is as good as mine. But what we do know is that Wendy is not the only one deceiving you. The NML directors have been as well....

I really can't be bothered to read that diatribe beyond the first page or so.

My original post made it perfectly clear that I was aware that the "barge" theory did not originate with Anomalous. But it was only Anomalous - as his own posts from that time prove - that seized upon it and asserted quite categorically that production would be double (i.e. 20,000 carats per month) from Day 1, because they would "mine both sides of the river". The whole concept is preposterous, and only someone who knew very little about alluvial diamond mining would have taken such a theory on board in the first place. They didn't have enough mobile plant to do it with, just for starters! Nor did they have any mechanism for shifting gravel from the river bank to the barge. It's just stupid. Oh, and the production figures do NOT bear out his theory. Check them out, if the topic interests you. They gybe perfectly with the original plan of 10k per month for the 5 months following workup, and 20k thereafter when the second shift would be introduced.

I could probably defend myself against the rest of the umpteen pages of bile if I could be bothered, but I do not consider Anomalous' imaginative pejorations and allegations worth even reading in full, let alone acting upon. I have him filtered on ADVFN, and will probably follow suit here. Someone who reports a company several times to the FSA and AIM because "Wendy made me do it" is not worth the effort.

Deceiving people is not my style, I'm afraid, and anyone who knows me knows I don't lie on bulletin boards. Ever. Life's too short.

This Anomalous1 is clearly a very sick and disturbed individual who was made it his full time occupation to denegrate NML, its Directors and its shareholders.

FILTERED!