Member Info for addicknt

Q, that was my assumption.

When it comes to selling Cascabel the current plc balance sheet will not be the reference point.

BTW, what was your reference to pbow about?

NMM, agreed.

Q, I take it you're referring to the plc's stated net assets?

So, the deal valued Adriatic at 100% of nav. As soon as we update ours to something closer to the truth, I'll be content with 100%!

Sorry, it's Dundee who has the link to Ecuador, not Adriatic.

I've just read about the deal announced yesterday concerning the Takeover of Adriatic Metals by the Canadian miner Dundee Precious Metals for $1.3bn.

Adriatic has an operation in Ecuador, amongst other places.

It's worth having a look.

What a refreshing change! Virtually a whole day with sensible posts and polite discussion relating to the company. Thanks, gentlemen. Long may it continue.

TI, if we'd taken BHP's offer of cash and technical support, who knows where we'd be now? It's fair to assume they'd be very much in the driving seat, but is that any different to the position we now find ourselves in with Jiangxi? I suppose one of the key differences is that NM could not work with BHP and he'd either have been booted out a couple of years earlier than he was, or the whole thing may have imploded.

On the face of it, the new team seem to have a strong working relationship with Jiangxi, but, given the team is doing its best to avoid falling into their clutches at a low value, will the relationship survive the test of time?

The decision to avoid dilution, which we all applauded, may have simply delayed the inevitable, but it may have also delayed our progress.

The conundrum is straightforward; we want cash and we need technical support, but we also want to hang onto control. Are these two conflicting ambitions compatible?

TI, this was BHP's argument which, as we know, was roundly rejected by NM and most private investors. Perhaps they were right all along?

I completely agree. As it stands, and without the various permits, it may be difficult to argue for a reasonable NAV based valuation, which is why the team wants to take this further down the development path. It's all about improving our negotiating position.

RT, obviously I'm onside with your thinking, but are any of those deals comparable to our situation?

Where has all this talk of an ASX listing come from? Why would we go to the expense of a listing, which will not be insubstantial, when the reason for leaving TSX was to save money? None of this makes sense to me.

Regardless of whether it's accurate or not, it will not happen in June, or July. Have a look at GGP for an example of the timelines involved.

I should add that as far as Phoenix are concerned, they may have had little choice.

RT, I agree entirely. There's a good reason why very few are issued these days - they screw investors.

A further point of interest is the use of convertible prefs, which you don't see that often nowadays.

Phoenix Copper (market cap £7.5m) has signed an LOI for $75m floating rate Copper Bonds (2029-2033)with a minimum yield of 8.5%. The lender will also be issued with a raft of convertible prefs at zero par value, which, if converted, will account for 10% of enlarged equity.

Given Phoenix is a minnow, this looks like a pretty good deal, but the key interest for us is the fact investment funds are out there and various commentators are beginning to see signs of growing activity in the mining sector.

RT, was that aimed at me?

RT, don't worry, it was tongue in cheek. He also did a good job of flogging the company we discussed last week to Vujcic. He's no fool.

Good post, RT, but did my eyes deceive me? Did you really give some credit to PS? Surely not?

IP, why would BHP have the upper hand if we were listed on ASX? Incidentally, what evidence do you have to suggest we're going to do so? Even if we did, it isn't going to happen in four weeks. Amusingly, someone actually recommended your post.