Member Info for addicknt

Returning to the topic, the video posted by CMG at 14:50 is well worth watching. It provides a very balanced description of the position in Ecuador and the final section relating to the reasons why some projects succeed and others fail is very interesting.

Overall, it provides the nuance needed to understand our position and to my mind, offers an explanation of why things have taken so long and also why we're in an advantageous situation. If I were to wind back the clock to the time when I was thinking about investing here, I'd have liked to have seen this video.

No one in their right mind would continue to hold shares if they were that negative. Oh, hold on a minute...

Mather, interesting post which will be rubbishd by that depressing cloud of misery in Perth.

Nal, still no evidence and, with the greatest of respect to them, I'm pretty sure both our board and the government know a little bit more about the country than something called the Institute of American Countries, which appears to be an American university pressure group.

So I'll ask you again, where is your evidence supporting the claim that illegal mining is a problem at Cascabel?

As I thought, not a shred of direct evidence. As for being out of one's depth, you drowned years ago.

Where's your proof that illegal mining has been a problem at Cascabel? Where's your proof that there are security issues there? Is the area in which Cascabel is located subject to the emergency restrictions?

Over the past six to nine months have you completely ignored the various announcements, agreements and government statements relating to Cascabel? Of course you have - they don't tally with your agenda.

The fact is some of what you say is true, problems do exist, but you diminish your argument by applying everything to Cascabel when there's no evidence to support your hysterical claims.

Nal, I'm sorry I must have missed your post in which you were going to provide evidence that Cascabel has been affected by the issues you raised.

Interesting find, DBW.

Nal, good find. Now provide evidence that this affects Cascabel. And no, the country isn't under martial law.

Simple question, nal; do you have any evidence to suggest any of the things you mention are affecting Cascabel?

Incidentally, the other day you told us the country was being governed under martial law. Two points, it wasn't - it was in a state of emergency - the two things are very different and, having already been lifted in most parts of the country, it was finally rescinded across the entire country at the beginning of April.

Where I think you are right relates to the issue of the cadastre. I've never attributed any value to many of our 60 or so concessions and this reinforces my opinion.

We all know how much you'd love to see this fail, but I'm afraid your scaremongering requires more understanding and nuance.

Eloro, I know what I'd like to see, but I've no idea what will emerge, although I remain absolutely convinced we will not be taking this to production ourselves.

I was referring to the fact you appear to have only just caught up with my opinion. I was not referring to your views.

Nal, I've been saying this for years, so well done for catching up. And you're right about a junior partner being rogered.

Jerry, that was why I mentioned the sale of a percentage rather than ceding the stake in return for a free carry.

Orthern, I agree and have said so many times. I was merely speculating about the prospect of a jv, which I do not want.

Jerry, I should expand on my post.

I guess your comment implies ceding 50% in return for the full cost of the construction being borne by the partner who will then develop and manage the mine, and in due course we'll sit back and receive the flow of dividends? For me, this doesn't work. It would be years before we saw an income stream and I never trust management not to find excuses not to pay out.

If we are in fact going to go down a path to holding a long term interest in a jv, I'd prefer it if we sold the 50% (or whatever percentage is agreed) and part of the proceeds were distributed to shareholders. The remaining funds could then form a percentage of the cash required for us to stand our corner of the development costs - the remainder being raised in the non-dilutive manner suggested by the Board.

Either way, I've never liked the idea of a jv as I've never been able to put any figures together that make it an interesting proposition - at least in any reasonable timeframe. However, I do recognise we may end up going down this route, much as I don't want to.

It would depend upon there being some form of distribution.

Indeed not, and I'm so sorry it's messed up your plan to buy back in at that level.

SH, it was only a few weeks ago that you were telling us 5p was on the cards. Good to note we've doubled in value. Great stuff, lad! Keep it up!

Nal, I see, so they haven't left the country, but aren't actually doing anything. Doesn't sound particularly likely, does it?

Jerry, re our conversation, I thought I'd leave it for you to make the point!