Critical Elements Lithium Corp V.CRE

Amazing what a little tweeting does !🤞

[Rinny1]

Message Eric yesterday 
come on say something!!
 

close above 1.40$

[sheeplesleepers]

Who knew actually saying (or twiting somerhing ) would be a good thing.

[monkeyhere171]

This X-ing (tweet) means s**t IMO. He just had the interview last week and was very vague. For me, this simply means that he is trying to point out that Quebec is getting a hot spot for LITH, nothing more. The recent surge is probably shorts covering - first - the end of the month is coming and second cash out on decent profit and mitigate the risk of a possible surprise announcement. The company

[Wheeler]

Not that I disagree with everything you say monkey, or agree with everything either, but institutions don't buy millions of shares in big blocks, that would just drive the price up when they want to buy. They will buy in small blocks, selling some along the way to keep the price in check. 

[monkeyhere171]

What I meant is that international ownership is just 6% and they own an average of less than 200K shares - no one has a few million. Not necessary to buy millions in a single transaction. If this was such a screaming buy, why are we still sitting at 6% ownership - de-risked with a permit?

[Rinny1]

Because CRE on the TSX Venture exchange!! Nice to be trading on the TSX. Once a Deal made as for financing, CRE will be a totally different company. CRE will treated with respect as a company. Day 2 in the Green, hopefully more positive posts.  Go CRE Go  buy more if you can !!

[monkeyhere171]

Should be read as *Institutional ownership* not international... For comparison, a producing company has: - Piedmont Lithium Inc. (PLL) - 52% of Shares Held by Institutions - Sigma Lithium Corporation (SGML.V) - 65.47% of Shares Held by Institutions - Livent Corporation (LTHM) - 102.73% of Shares Held by Institutions CRE as a permitted, derisked asset in a safe jurisdiction

[Rinny1]

Totally agree with you !! Hopefully the institutions step in soon. Sooner the better. 

[nflyby]

I'm with Monkey with this one. I repeat the same thing to Patrick every time I talk to him. I don't think it is normal that we have almost zero institutions behind the stock. Patrick seem to be working very hard to get institutions in, but it just seems very hard at this point. In fact all am hearing each time is excuses... it's getting ridiculous... I'm still uncertain if it is

[bigops]

nflyby.....please point out any other company that is pre-production, without financing and without offtake that has any sort of real institutional ownership....i look forward to the list until you find that list -- don't spend too much time being so confused....its simple. Institutions simply do not allocate to projects at this stage....it is not their mandate. and by the way -- please name

[monkeyhere171]

Bigops, That's the point - there is NO other publicly traded company with permits in a safe jurisdiction besides CRE and the institutional ownership is the same as an exploration or junior. It was CRE management (JSL/Eric) who said during the interviews before the permits that institutional ownership is low because of the risk and the longer permit process and that all will change once

[bigops]

monkey....no disrespect....you literally have no understanding of the junior resource market if you think institutions should be in CRE now.....proof is in the pudding....no other juniors without financing/offtake/path to production have insittutions owning any significant amount of stock and by the way -- JS and pals are 100% correct when they say that much of the stock is in very strong hands..

[bigops]

and monkey....given you believe that mgmt are behind all the ills of this company....we are up above 1.50 today....may be a good time to sell??

[nflyby]

Bigops, I’m not going to answer your question the way you would probably like. The point  is not to get angry among any here. Every time there is shareholders complaining about management on this board, there is others that feel the complain unjustified to a point that it is almost them that receive the complain.  There are parts of this management that I like, and I have pointed it out

[Dareg]

I think some of the reasoning for low institutional participation may be because CRE management has expressed a desire to avoid excessive share dilution . Institutions love to take down the SP and get their position at a bargain price, along with warrants. Cre mamnagement demonstrated its refusal to dilute cheaply when they placed a chunk of $1.75 shares at below the prevaling SP at that time

[bigops]

Institutions typically do not take positions in companies that have not secured financing for operations. Please point to any institution in North America that has a mandate that allows them to invest in: -pre-development mining -non-financed projects -market cap under $500m -stock price under $3 Institutional ownership happens upon the announcement of financing and the complete derisking of a