London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
tl - thanks for that. It's comforting to know that we have 30% of a T1 gold-copper discovery next to a processing facility at FMV - it's literally cash in the bank but this 'cash' has the ability to keep expanding with more drilling
schleimel - no those words are not in the JV. JV ends at completion of stage 4 is how I read it. NC have the right to buy a further 5% at FMV. GGP can do what they want with the remaining 25%. But at stage 4 - they have liability for their share of any spend above $20mill US on feasibility study costs - if the study costs do indeed exceed this. Then they are responsible also for their share of mine development costs - CAPEX - but not likely to be earth shattering. Telfer is there already. Telfer will take a toll processing charge is how I would think it would work.
I am a novice to mining. In the oil business minority partners can make life quite tough for the operator/major partner. They have to be involved and agree to everything, and approve all OPEX budgets and additional CAPEX. But at the end of the day - all partners want the same - maximise the return.
Schlemiel, if I was an insto I wouldn’t be happy to buy if I knew it was all coming from directors who were selling. So this just clarifies that it won’t be, at least not from the top two.
Just to be clear it's been done for tax purposes, read the top paragraph then the bottom one.
The Australian income year ends on 30 June. You have from 1 July to 31 October to lodge your tax return for the previous income year.
The Company and both executive directors have agreed to extended the vesting date for the options listed above from 25 September 2020 to 5 July 2021. All other terms of the options including the expiry date remain unchanged.
I quite like the theory that they are essentially signalling to the market that they have no intention of selling their GGP shares for a while. The previous similar gesture - GH's purchase of a large number of shares at 2.7p a few months ago - lit the booster rocket. Strap yourselves for a fast ride!
'The other 25% can be sold at whatever GGP think is fair market value and to anyone.' Is this one of the clauses in the JV agreement? thanks
ong - We'll find out soon enuff mate
JV - NC have full control of what happens with JV. They are in a rush to complete - and to own 70% of the Hav block.
I am certain they will want to continue an amicable relationship with GGP. When the JV is completed - they relinquish the right to first refusal on the rest of the Paterson GGP Blocks (there is some strange text in the RNS about extending JV or something - but to know exactly what happens you would need to see legal agreement).
MRE - GGP should have all the data that NC have from drilling - GGP have a person on the management committee - and as a partner have a right to all the data - and the output of any concept/feasibility studies. GH/CB I do not think will be easily fooled or rolled over. And I do not think NC will want to roll them over.
The MRE will get bigger I think as more drilling data is obtained.
The 5% has to be sold at FMV. The other 25% can be sold at whatever GGP think is fair market value and to anyone.
If we get good Scallywag initial drill results - I'd be very happy for GGP to enter into JV negotiations with NC - but also with any other major who might be prepared to offer better terms.
Very interesting times ahead. The 23rd July is just a small step in what is to come. patience is required here.
It could be they have knowledge that could be classed as insider trading so have been advised to defer. Just a guess.
Do you believe that Heddle and Baxter have come under pressure which may explain today's news? The wording in today's RNS, that is 'have agreed', does suggest a recommendation has been made to them and they 'have agreed' to it. I wonder who exactly has applied this pressure on Heddle-Baxter if indeed pressure has been brought to bear?
Schlemiel, Solgold has just retraced yesterdays gain. No big deal. Long proactive interview was really very newsworthy barring some stuff about drilling and new prospects. Pity they don’t have a paddygal over there. Lots of jungle might make it difficult though.
SOLG's been hit today for some reason. I wonder if the market's heard something about Newcrest following the removal of their rep from the SOLG board. Will Newcrest sell their SOLG stake or will they sit it through?
Ah, there's a Proactive interview this morning, that's a different one. If I think it adds anything important to our understanding of NCM re: GGP, I'll post the link here.
@TT I did see that. If that's the same video Hopefully mentioned, it was interesting but hardly surprising. Asked about NCM walking away, he's not going to say, "It's our fault, we were bad partners." Whoever is at fault, he's going to blame NCM.
I do recognise that NCM has a large measure of control here and if they don't play fair, GGP will struggle and NCM will get themselves a better deal than they maybe deserve. Is NCM going to get themselves a reputation as a good JV partner or a bad one? I'm expecting a good one.
There's two massive reasons, to me, why this JV is going forward amicably and, if ended, will be ended amicably. The first is Telfer -- NCM needs Hav for Telfer, so they either need to make the JV work or reach an agreement to buy Hav. That's one of stebol's points, and it's a huge one. The JV is a win for both parties so they'll make it work amicably.
The second is Scal. NCM wants a piece of that pie if it is as big as we think it might be.
I suppose there's a third -- NCM doesn't want to get a bad rep with other juniors. The Solgold thing actually helps us in that regard -- if they have an ugly divorce from Solgold and follow it with one from GGP, nobody will want to do JVs with them.
I don't think the NC / SolG situation has any real bearing for a couple of reasons;
It pre-existed Haveiron, at a time when NC were desperate to increase reserves.
Newcrest have recently increased their exposure to Ecuador so job done there.
Cascabel isn't 45km from Telfer - NC very focused on ROCE and Hav (and possibly other nearby, yet to be drilled resources), are a far better bet if it's a large as we all believe.
Australia is politically more stable than Ecuador - if the resources are on your doorstep then it makes perfect sense to mine there.
I'm not expecting a divorce, amicable or otherwise, anytime soon. The current JV suits both parties.
Lots of other reasons as well I expect but the kitchen, and a nice cold bottle, are calling.
Next week is going to be a rush!!
Mickey applies to any asset for a taxable Australian resident.
I'm not sure if this is the same interview, but I posted this on Saturday:
"I think the view that major's have had about junior's, up until very recently, are that junior's are the short term custodians of major's assets. We certainly don't view it that way. It's our asset and if they want it they'll have to pay for it."
Plus it’s only Solgold view so still only one sided story till proven otherwise. Our relationship with Newcrest seems good so far.
@stuart6040 when I bought into this share my main concern was the JV mre declaration. Obviously Newcrest will want to maximise their profits as will Greatland, bit like a divorce settlement hope the gloves don't come off.
Good thing about this story is that Newcrest are over 10% shareholders in Solgold, whereas here they are not a major holder. Story got me thinking though. Happier now I saw that though :-)
That’s interesting hopefullygold. Two sides to the coin at least but I’m interested to see how NC play this one. It’s all very well they have been so great to work with when things have been going so swimmingly,but we forget they are a huge mcap corporate,they will want the best deal and they will get it a fair amount of the time. Hopefully our asset will be the elephant we all believe it is and do all the talking. Can’t wait for next week
TMT, I think the directors options have the following clause attached....
“ . All options will vest immediately upon a change of control event.”
So if there is a buy out, the options become ‘live’.
I think you may be on to something when you say it could be for tax purposes though.
Missed that, will have to check it out. Things have really gone sour between them, haven't they?
@TmT. Did you see the interview with the CEO of solgold this morning. He virtually said Newcrest were trying to screw the company shareholders by stripping it financially.
@mickey "Does that apply to AIM shared Jambo?"
It's Aussie cap gains tax, they don't care what asset it is. Could be shares or a gold nugget or a collection of framed Paddy Gall diagrams, own it a year, you have a huge tax savings on any capital gains.
I don't see how that could be relevant here, though. They've delayed owning it, not brought it forward. They've made it harder to get that tax break on these. It could explain why they exercised other options early, but not why they've delayed vesting.
@Jambo "this suggests they expect a full buy out of GGP"
It could suggest that but without some Scal results it would surprise me a lot. How could they agree on a value for Scal?
I won't mind it if I'm wrong, though!