Member Info for addicknt

Just scroll back. The first post from TheItalian contains the link to the YouTube interview. It's really worth listening to as it contains all sorts of interesting nuggets. In fact, it's the best interview I've ever heard from one of our CEOs. It also contains his very odd comment about 30 cents.

TheItalian posted the link on the 27th at 11:31. The heading is SC Interview.

Q, it was in the recent interview which was posted on here.

Q, so how do you account for the fact he specifically said we're not in the process of raising the project funding? I thought your mantra was always to believe what the company says.

What I most certainly accept is that he's said something to the government which has given them confidence in us. What that is, I've no idea.

The other thing to bear in mind is that he said $2bn was a lot of money for a small company like ours to raise. He's not wrong. He also said we are not in the process of raising the project funding, which is hardly surprising as there are still outstanding issues before we would be able to approach the market.

I think the whole thing is a gigantic red herring, but that still leaves the unanswered question of why he thought it necessary.

Q, you're ignoring the manner in which SC answered the question about production. He was far from being unequivocal.

What he is very clear about is putting the building blocks in place to ensure we're on the front foot when it comes to negotiations, and this links back to his comment about presenting a turnkey project.

RK, the point I was trying to make is that whatever the motivation, it was a very strange thing to do and I can't see why it he thought it a sensible comment. I sent an email to our esteemed investor relations person, but inevitably I haven't received a reply.

Eloro, I had no idea you didn't rate SC.

HfH, the problem with this is that a Board recommendation is significant when it comes to a takeover. However, I can't see Mather accepting an offer at this level.

What I don't understand is why he chose to answer this question when he could have so easily have side-stepped it? And why did the interviewer come up with such a random number? Was this simply a mis-step, or was it done deliberately?

I'm sure it has happened before, but I can't recall a CEO of public company making such an observation, particularly as we are in a period of heightened speculation. It's all very odd, especially as SC would lose out on his options.

Rampers are a lot more fun than the curmudgeons, but I'm pretty sure you're making this up, aren't you?

Well, we're in auction, which is pretty damn unusual for the before a 2 day Bank Holiday.

Ho, ho! More like flogging a dead horse, I suspect.

I suppose this is exactly the right time of year to be experiencing the Resurrection.

Eloro, I'm sure you're right, even if he was two days late.

RK, fair point and apologies to those who've been p1ssed off by this latest exchange. The guy is completely beyond the pale and I'll re-bin him.

Nal, I've already given you chapter and verse, which you've obviously chosen to ignore.

For one last time; it was in Mining Journal and BBG kindly re-posted the article on the 26th at 14:12. Even you should be able to scroll back and find it.

Since it confirms what you were saying in your original post, I'm at a total loss as to why you're being such a total pill0ck.

Smick, no disrespect, but I don't like liars, particularly when those lies are directed at me. So, if it's okay with you I'll continue to post exactly what I want.

Let's get this straight shall we?

Your original post referred to the possibility of a jv between Newmont and Jiangxi. I pointed out that this rumour had appeared on this board on Tuesday and was contained in the Mining Journal article BBG posted. Now your most recent post refers to something completely different which was said in July last year. Did you actually read BBG's post at 14:12 on the 26th? I suspect not.

And the weird thing is I was actually confirming the source of the rumour of a jv with Jiangzi, which is precisely what you had posted.

Don't you get just how utterly insane you are?

I never denied the article also said that, unlike you who refused to accept the reference to Jiangxi. So tell me, did the article say what I said or are you incapable of admitting your mistake?

Nal, since you appear to have scuttled away, I'll spell out the relevant section of BBG's re-post of the article.

"but a new theory doing the rounds with market sources suggests BHP's interest has dropped away and Newmont, under CEO Tom Palmer, is the likely kingmaker, perhaps via a jv with Jiangxi"

This was posted by BBG at 14:12 on the 26th and is contained within the second paragraph on page two of his three page post.

So far from me apologising to you, perhaps you'd be prepared to admit you were wrong...again.