Member Info for addicknt

Eloro, have the announcements of the last 12 months completely passed you by?

Phil, he hasn't got a clue, nor does he have any idea what a new ceo would actually do differently.

Orthern, as you know, there are very specific issues associated with Pebble which do not pertain at Cascabel. But you are right, nothing's certain, which is true for so many mining projects, although we're in a better position now than we've ever been.

Medi, I'm not expecting any further news before the agm. The last RNS was, in effect, the agm statement.

If you want to avoid boardroom chaos, deep concern at Franco and Osisko, government uncertainty, competitor derision, further delays and the risk of complete failure, vote for Scott.

However, if you like the idea of destroying the current strategy but don't have the first idea of what should replace it, you'll find yourself in esteemed company.

Be warned, these doomsters haven't offered a single credible alternative idea, mainly because they haven't got one. They want change for changes sake and damn the consequences.

I see, so if someone disagrees with you they're being argumentative? And how do you know Scott is in Canada?

Have they listened to him?

You appear to imply those people who want online access are simply 'moaners'. I'm sorry, but I disagree. It's an essential part of corporate governance and communication with shareholders.

RP, you ask is the company positioned to achieve the milestones?

FN spent a very long time doing their dd on the project and would have, in full cooperation with the company and the government, arrived at a timetable that all parties consider to be achievable. This was not some unilateral decision, for the simple reason that would have been plain stupid. They have advanced the money and agreed the timetable in the full expectation the company can deliver and, as you'll be aware, they are working in close cooperation with us on an ongoing basis and have offered us full support.

There is no definitive answer to your question, but given that no one would simply agree to 750m on a whim, we must assume they are completely confident about the outcome, and this is about as much as we shareholders could ask.

Reasonable questions until you get to the finance bit.

1) You obviously haven't read the thread on here relating to the DGR loan. It's been sorted.

2)Is the fact further funding from FN is contingent on various milestones news to you? It isn't to the rest of us.

3) No meaningful update?!! How about the Exploitation agreement? And the FN deal isn't exactly insignificant.

4) I think it's fair to say the 750m funding deal protects shareholders rather well.

Pbow, sorry, I can't recall the exact announcement, but it definitely appeared somewhere. It was some time ago.

Pbow, a while back the company said Citi were no longer retained. We don't need them at the moment.

DBW, I've voted in support of his re-appointment.

Going back to the point about transparency and comms, we're still totally in the dark about DGR's claim that the CIPA has been 'successfully completed'. I've had no response to my email to Chris, which is not good. It seems inconceivable that we have indeed 'successfully completed' it and the company has decided not to tell us. If we haven't, DGR should have issued a correction to their announcement. Strange, innit?

Eloro, I thought that post was written by you using a new name.

Funnily enough I agree with some of the points, particularly about transparency and communication, which I've complained about on many occasions. Similarly he makes a valid point about repetition, but if you're trying to sum up events of the year, repetition is inevitable.

However, the idea no progress has been made and the implication he's sitting on his backside doing nothing is patently balls and the evidence is there to prove it.

Come the 5th we'll find out how many shareholders agree with you.

Eloro, I expect him to deliver on the milestones which are due during 2025 and if he does he'll have my support for 2026.

Brisvegas, yes and no.

It allows them to keep their hands on by far their biggest and most promising asset, but that has come at a cost. I suppose some may argue that Mather's punishing DGR shareholders for his own mistakes, but if were a holder in DGR I'd be jolly grateful he's stepped up to save the company. He knows what our shares are worth and he's dug deep to make sure they didn't fall into unfriendly hands.

Mather saves DGR by borrowing from himself. The good news for us is that it removes a potential overhang of our shares.

And that's precisely where you go wrong. He has achieved a great deal this year and his description that's it's been 'transformational' is entirely accurate.

Bozi, yep, my thoughts exactly.

Eloro, I'm looking forward to the 5th, and as for next year I'll be interested to hear your reaction if SC has delivered the various milestones.

Jerry, which is why the company is pursuing the strategy of derisking in an attempt to raise the sp to a more realistic level before bidding starts. We tried to sell when the sp was low and it didn't deliver anything which was anywhere near acceptable.