Member Info for addicknt

incidentally, there's one thing you seem not to understand. mather is backing scott and is supporting the strategy, so what would he do differently? in fact, what could he do differently? answer: nothing.

you appear to want a bloke who lives thousands of miles from where the action is, who ****ed the whole thing up in the first place and is unpopular in the industry, to replace a man who has made giant steps this year. that really would be dumb. anyway, you're in a tiny minority and most shareholders have understood reality and accepted the situation for what it is.

What is the point of your post?

Did the result of the AGM pass you by completely? He isn't going anywhere for the next 12 months and has been endorsed by 93% of shareholders who voted. Unless you want to spend the next 12 months howling at the moon, you'd better get used to the fact.

TI, good post.

DBW, yup. As we all know, well, most of us know, he's not a shareholder and knows nothing about the company. Which is exactly what I was saying yesterday, although a certain antipodean loon seems to think he is.

I think you'll find it isn't an AIM stock, but you wouldn't know that would you?

Given BHP themselves recognise Cascabel's significance, and that they already have a foot in the door, it makes you wonder why they haven't taken their interest further...yet.

Interesting article, thanks for posting. It's also interesting to note the relative depths.

So, BHP rank Cascabel as being one of the major global discoveries and yet some people still believe it's all a myth.

I'm sure your point about the government is right. Over the past 12 months they've made a great play of presenting the country as being both mining and, more generally, investor friendly. They won't want to fall at one of the first hurdles. Having said that, if you can find the name of the right official I'll send him a fountain pen for Christmas.

I find Mr Google's translation service works quite well! Pity we didn't use it when NM first bid for CGP! (whenever I think of that translation delay BS, it makes me wonder why on earth did they think they'd get away with such total b0ll0cks)

I suppose the question for me is, how much detail was included in the declaration? Was it no more than an expression of intent, or did it actually cover the ground in full detail? In other words, is the CIPA 'oven ready' and just waiting for the right official to find his ballpoint, or is the detail still being thrashed out?

Pbow, the wording of the March announcement was somewhat opaque.

"Solgold is pleased to announce the signing of a joint declaration with the Government of Ecuador in preparation for the. execution of the CIPA" They then go on to talk about the "definitive CIPA" which will be signed in Ecuador.

So what did the declaration include? Was it just a statement issued for PR purposes at PDAC, or did it have real substance? What's happened to the definitive agreement? And why did DGR say it had been successfully completed?

I'm not doubting him, but it would be interesting to know why HH thinks it'll appear in H1 and where he's getting his info from, although I do not expect you to break his confidence.

Pbow, who is HH?

And the situation surrounding the CIPA remains a mystery.

Were DGR being completely honest when they stated that it has been successfully concluded? If they were wrong why haven't they been forced to correct the assertion? If they were correct, why haven't we been told?

The company have told us many of the areas to be covered in the CIPA were dealt with in the EA, but does this mean we don't need a CIPA, or is it now on the back-burner?

I'm sure a while back I read that the company expected to conclude the CIPA by calendar year end. If this is true, they're running out of time to produce it.

The company really does need to clarify this issue.

Thanks Pbow, I'll have a read.

Have you recovered from your uncharacteristic outburst?

Read it again, it included an outlook for next year. Does it not occur to you that at this stage there's nothing else to add?

We had one on 18th Nov.

My own view is that next year will not only be about Cascabel. We cannot simply sit back and do nothing with our other assets. I can't imagine the government would be happy and as shareholders I think it's fair to expect some form of action.

Certainly not. Constructive criticism from people who understand the business is valuable. You don't fit that bill. The weirdos are the non-shareholders who do the same thing across multiple companies.

Do you honestly believe he's a shareholder? He's no more than another one of the weirdos who inhabit these boards, going from share to share rubbishing everything without knowing the first thing about the company concerned. His mate BSR is exactly the same. God knows what motivates them...perhaps they've got nothing better to do with their lives.

But there's another point: why on earth would you seek to support someone who's intent on destroying the value of your shareholding? It's a bit like an arsonist turning up at your house and saying he's going to burn it down, but adding "don't worry, I don't like that addicknt bloke". To which you'd reply; "that's okay then. Go ahead".

As for making things up, how long have you been on here? How many aliases have you used? Oh yes, it's nine years isn't it? Or is it 18 months, as demonstrated by your profile? It's you that's the inveterate liar and distorter of the truth, as you ably demonstrate almost every day.

So, in your opinion all companies are the same, are they?

If you think FN have committed 750m to a business and management team they have no confidence in you really are away with the fairies.

Including options he has circa 50m shares. If you think that isn't an incentive you're living in cloud cuckoo land.