Member Info for addicknt

'This proves my point'. What point was that?

'But they listed in Canada'. Yes, it's a secondary listing and is largely irrelevant.

'Do you think their investments aren't more secure than buying shares?' No, they aren't. They hold ordinary shares with the same rights as everyone else.

'If it's all good why is the sp up and down?' I take it you've never invested in the stock market before?

Anyway, you're now firmly in the same category as the other idiots who grace us with their insight and wisdom and can firmly be. ignored.

A final point; you ask why didn't we list in Australia and raise funds there, although I've no idea what your point is. I don't know what lay behind the original decision, but probably had something to do with the fact that London is a far larger market and, theoretically, it provides easier access to funds (this is no longer the case). In any event, and if you knew anything of the history of the company, a considerable portion of our early stage funding came from two Australian mining majors, BHP and Newcrest.

Your attempt to draw a comparison is utterly fallacious, but if that's what you believe it's just as well you're not invested. Anyway, I'm sure we're all grateful for your helpful warnings.

The Sirius story was a very sad one, not just for the shareholders and people of North Yorkshire, but also for the UK. But to suggest Cascabel is a similar case is to stretch matters too far.

You refer to the Australian connection, but have ignored the point I made last night about control now residing elsewhere (although I'm not sure what your point is anyway. Are you suggesting all Australian mining executives are useless crooks?

From memory, Sirius did not have three mining majors on it's share register. Its product, whilst being interesting, is not copper and is not subject to a global race to secure more.

Ultimately, investors simply didn't buy into the project whereas they have with us and this is the key difference.

BSR, you refer to a Australian maverick, are you referring to Mather? If so, what's he got to do with our Canadian cfo buying shares? I take it you are also aware that management control shifted to Canada at the time of the Cornerstone merger? And btw, Caldwell is also Canadian.

I was diagnosed and treated in 2020 - my treatment was delayed by six months due to the ludicrous decision to shut the NHS- and decided to talk about it openly with my mates and persuade them to get tested. In the intervening four years eight of them have also been diagnosed. It's like a bloody epidemic.

'Break's off'...erm? Has something broken, or has the tea break been cancelled?

Eloro, have you completely lost the plot? You came up with this BS before the last AGM and just in case you need reminding, the result was you and your fellow loons managed to accumulate a grand total of 15m votes. Sadly for you, 2bn shares didn't have much interest in your gibberish, and it'll be the same this year.

So, feel free to rant away from the sidelines whilst in the meantime SC gets on with delivering his strategy, which apparently you still haven't quite got to grips with.

Eloro, if you haven't yet worked out why we should vote for him, I'm afraid I can't help you.

You really don't get, do you?

The reason we needed the 10m was because the facility negotiations quite clearly overran. If you think we suddenly decided we needed 750m and left it until the last minute to approach the lenders, you know even less about corporate life than I had imagined. This loan took months to arrange, which you would understand if you listened to SC and his observation about dd.

To answer my own question, I think this implies we can't start until the geotechnical drilling is complete, which appears to be the only ongoing workflow as depicted in the graphic.

Interesting to note that the second tranche of the loan won't be drawn until Q2 '25 and only at that stage will we start the feasibility study, which will be completed in H2 '25.

Given we were told a great of the work had already been done, I wonder why we won't start until next year. I'm confused.

The graphic showing the various milestones already achieved is a helpful guide for anyone who still thinks SC has been sitting on his backside doing nothing.

Brad, that's peanuts in the scheme of things.

Brad, which big sells? I can't see any.

Novice, I was simply answering BSR's post.

1) We are not in an area of ancestral lands/protected forest or indigenous people, so this isn't an issue for us and is one of the major advantages we have over other projects. We also enjoy extremely good community relations, to which our lenders are fully committed.

2) No.

3) That's risk we all take, but given the amount of work that's already been done and the recent extensive dd undertaken by our lenders, there's no reason to feel pessimistic.

4) First of all we have removed the possibility of being screwed, which was a real risk. As for the future funding, if everything goes to plan and based on our track record, it should not be an issue, but there's always risk attached to junior miners. You must make up your own mind as to whether you consider the level of risk to be acceptable.

BSR, if you genuinely want an analysis of the company I suggest you read the Hannam report TheItalian has kindly posted.

TI, thanks very much for posting this excellent analysis.

Tesla, total nonsense.

'All I see so far is a company with land and gold deposits underneath'. So no copper or silver, then?

'Solg have proved they couldn't organize a p1ss up in a brewery'. Really!! I suspect you could count on the fingers of one hand the number of juniors which have managed to raise such a significant amount of money in recent years.

Sure, Mather made a mess of things and DC remains a bit of an enigma, but since SC has been in situ he's gone about the task methodically and with great success. This is no the same company and perhaps you need to update your thinking.