Member Info for addicknt

Nothing, he's not a director.

I do know that the speculation around the budget has led to many people making decisions about pension savings which they would not have done under normal circumstances. For example, HL have been overwhelmed by clients looking to withdraw the tax free element of their pensions. SIPP holders have been selling investments to turn them into cash and then taking out the money.

This is just one of the consequences of Reeves ineptitude.

Roxi, as the RNS says, we are working towards turn-key status, which is not synonymous with being a miner.

Pbow, I see that one of the new appointments, Mr Huppman, has worked on mining projects in 50 different countries with a total value of $50bn. I imagine our friend in Australia will have something to say about that!

It provides a conclusive answer to BBG's claims about an accelerated permitting schedule. Hopefully, it will put this argument to bed.

Ship, have a look further down the thread. SM posted the details at 12:05.

Orthern, I agree, we are very much a news driven stock and the fundamentals are ignored, as are the regionals.

One further thing about Tufford; he is clearly no longer working in a retained capacity. No paid advisor would make the sort of comments he did on Telegram.

Bozi, I think we can safely discount any of that BHP secret deal b0ll0cks and I agree with Orthern's comments, although there will be a number of important announcements made within the period which hopefully will move the dial.

SM, not exactly earth-shattering news from Tufford, is it? I think most of us had worked this out some time ago, particularly his comment about cash.

NMM, are you sure it won't be virtual? What's the point of the various directors travelling half way around the world only to sit through a tick-box exercise? And you're right about the Perth/Brisbane bit - perhaps NAL is now on the board and they've moved the HQ to his garage?

Going back to the AGM, I sincerely hope they do it properly this time. By that I mean a CEO/Chairman's report of events of the past year and a chance for shareholders to pose questions. I'm still angry about the performances in 2020 and last year, when shareholders were treated with utter contempt.

Q, if, as you say, they aren't interested in explorers, why would they buy any more shares?

We know they haven't been involved in the most recent placings, but is that because they weren't asked, or did they decline the opportunity?

I stopped believing BHP were the most likely buyers some time ago and have seen nothing from them which suggests this isn't the case. What started off as a strategic move by BHP is now less than a footnote in their thinking and I doubt they spend any time thinking about it. In other words, in the right circumstances and at the right price, they are sellers. But who knows?

Q, what do you think are BHP's intentions? Are they now merely a passive investor? If so, one can assume they'll happily sell if the right deal appears.

Nal, good to see you've just caught up with the article which Adieu posted yesterday. I suppose 24 hours late isn't bad for you, so well done.

As for my comment, could you please point out anything I said which isn't factually correct?

Interesting that they describe us as an Australian mining explorer. We don't have any operating businesses based in Australia and, as far as I'm aware, no full time employees. In the past few years all decisions and important developments have emanated from Ecuador and Canada.

RK, I'm not sure I'd read anything into the earlier date. As for the announcement, someone pointed out yesterday that it's something to do with TSX requirements.

Bozi, sorry, I didn't see your post!

BBG.

1) Why do we need to attend yet more conferences? There's not a person in the industry who isn't aware of us. Why do we need to attract fund managers at this stage? We don't need new equity and they can't buy in the market. The only caveat to this we may have to find a home for the DGR shares, although I suspect we've already considered that possibility.

2) Who are these royalty firms you've been talking to?

3) We don't know what the plans are for the next stage of funding and they may well include an off-take deal. You can guarantee this is being worked on.

4) You are right, we do need a chairman and it's a total mystery as to why we haven't already got one, but Twigger was very far from being 'fantastic'. In fact he was hopeless.

5) If we got rid of SC chaos would descend...again. When you talk about liquidity are you referring to shares available in the market, or do you think we need cash? As for attention, as I said earlier, the whole industry already knows everything about us.

The plan the board is pursuing is crystal clear, as are the reasons why we've had to go down this route, even though all of us would have preferred the situation to be different.

BBG, you often raise some interesting and valid questions, but the stuff about SC is total balls, particularly your absurd claim that he doesn't live in Ecuador.

Bozi, yup, I think that's exactly what happened, with one caveat. We may have had expressions of interest which significantly undervalued the asset , consequently we've been forced to take the de-risking route.

Eloro, thanks. I guess it confirms what we already knew, with the added comment about the majors. There's no such thing as a fully de-risked project, so I wonder how far we'll have to go to reach the point of Cascabel becoming an acceptable risk?