Member Info for addicknt

Nal, BR departed a long time ago, June 2022 I think, and we have no idea how long it took them to dispose of their holding.

TI, agreed.

Nal, are you really suggesting this stock isn't illiquid? Have a look at the daily volumes and just how sensitive the price is to small buys or sells.

Eloro, if you honestly believe he won't hit the milestones I'd suggest you bail-out. It would likely be the end of the road.

I know it's a difficult thing to do, but we have to separate the current sp from the benefits we'll see in due course. Our stock is so illiquid that the decline in value has been caused by small investors losing patience - which is understandable - it does not reflect the value of our business.

As it stands we are very much at the Orphan Stage on the Lassonde, in fact we are an exemplar of the Curve and are tracking it almost perfectly. Give it time.

Eloro, everything he's currently doing is designed to deliver real shareholder value...surely you can see that? And do I really need to remind you that he's delivered a finance package that very few CEOs of mining juniors ever do? Why do you dismiss this? It's the most significant thing which the company has achieved since the first positive drilling results.

Anyway, I remain completely confident he'll win the support of shareholders and we can forget about this distraction.

It's now time to turn on the rugby and watch us thrash the Aussies.

Eloro, I rather suspect that if we reach Dec'25 and we're 'no further along' we won't actually have a business left.

Unless SC delivers on the milestones FN will not advance any more cash, and that will be that. Which brings us to the question of a new CEO.

Everything is now time-critical and the disruption caused by yet another boardroom upheaval would undoubtedly disrupt a very tight timetable. So how would FN react? They've provided the facility in part because they believe SC will deliver. If he's no longer in post and we have to spend months trying to find someone new, will they provide more funding? The risk that they won't is far too great to be ignored.

By the way, how do you know he's an ineffectual leader? If this were actually the case how did he win FN's support? Additionally, we have no way of knowing how he performs around the boardroom table nor with the workforce. What we do know is that he has FN's support, and frankly what you or I think is completely irrelevant.

BBG, your love affair with Mather is touching, but totally misplaced. On this particular issue even Nal has a much better grasp of the situation than you. And if you think NM would take up the reins if SC was removed you're living in fairy land. He will never hold the top job in this company again.

Eloro, as private investors we always have a choice.

You talk about the fresh ideas a new CEO would bring to the party; do you imagine our board hasn't examined every option? The truth is our options are very limited. We either sell Cascabel for whatever we can get, or, we pursue the current strategy.

This is not an operating business where a turnaround specialist would have many choices. For example, if cash was the problem he could decide to liquidate stock at a loss in order to bolster cash, or he could negotiate with creditors to extend finance facilities, etc, etc. We are not in that position and this is where the argument to replace SC falls down; there simply aren't a huge range of options available and the idea that NM, or anyone else, can magic them out of thin air is a myth.

Sometimes I think you believe I'm happy with the situation; I most certainly am not. But I do understand the chaos a change of leadership at this stage would bring about. The new strategy obviously emerged at the end of last year - although it took a while for it to become clear. The milestones have been established and SC's job over the next 12 months is to deliver them.

BBG, are you getting proper treatment for your condition?

Smick, where's the evidence to support that argument? He has an influential holding and I'm assuming he makes contributions at board meetings, but I can't see his fingerprints on any of the major developments of the past 12 months.

BBG, Jerry talks a great deal more sense that you ever will. He also has vastly more experience of markets than you.

DBW, on this occasion I will also vote for him. Although I don't think he's a particularly likeable bloke, and I really didn't like his hubris, I do think he has an important role as an NED. And you're right, he did prevent a cheap takeover and SC has taken this a step further.

And NM was off the scene when SC delivered the package. Lenders base their decisions on who's in the chair when they make their investment decision, not who was in charge several years ago. Having said that, the original relationship will not have harmed our position.

Mather's the past, not the future.

Adieu, of course the one thing which differentiates us from other juniors is the small matter of 750m. Hopefully we'll meet the milestones and will avoid the absolute stuffing many explorers endure at the hands of the majors.

Don't forget what the ex-CEO of Glencore said; 'The strategy of the majors is to screw junior explorers'. SC is doing his level best to steer us away from this fate.

Why would another ceo have more chance of selling the company? How is he going to force buyers to come to the table with an offer of a reasonable value? Do you not think the SR went through this process?

Over the next 12 months Caldwell has a very clear programme of deliverables. Should he fail to deliver I'll reassess the situation. So far he's done what he said he would. And what evidence do you have that the majors have no desire to engage with the company? The answer is, none.

I love the way you people dismiss a bloke who's delivered an Exploitation Agreement and a 750m funding package as if this was an easy stroll in the park. Utterly clueless.

Nal, so, no real tangible strategy then.

Would you suggest we should sell the company for a pittance? Because that's the alternative to the current strategy.

BBG's angst is caused by his overexposure and a complete loss of rationality. Your's is caused by your visceral loathing of Mather who, you believe, is still running the company - which he isn't. One minute people are saying SC's Mather's puppet, the next they're saying he's Sangha's, who I don't imagine is a great fan of Mather.

The fact is, no one has offered anything approaching a sensible alternative strategy and until they do their argument makes no sense.

The argument rumbles on and still no one has come up with any compelling argument as to what exactly a new ceo would do differently.

NMM, indeed. As I said the other day, if they are proposing to hold the agm behind closed doors we must voice our disapproval.

NMM, yep. Last month a Change of Director details was lodged at Companies House showing a change of residence from Canada to the US. I'm puzzled by this and would like an explanation.

I've also asked the company to clarify the CIPA position, but so far I've not received a reply.

BBG, that would be a very welcome development...provided they can find a good one who's genuinely independent.

Metoooo, perhaps he's taken heed of BBG's comments and feels he has no other option other than to retire.

The Management Circular tells us the Charter of the Strategy Committee can be found in the Report and Accounts, so I checked.

They tell us the Committee did not meet in the reporting period and that it was disbanded in January '24. The reason given is that the full board has been making all decisions relating to strategy so there is no need for a specific committee.

I've spotted one thing which has mystified me and it relates to SC. (in fact I noticed this the other day from another source) A gold star to anyone who spots it.