Member Info for addicknt

SH, as I said, we'd all have preferred this not to have happened, but you're intelligent enough to realise that, like virtually everything in life, the world moves on quickly and incidents are forgotten (admittedly, I don't think Mexico will forget, but they're not relevant to us) Their are far more important things to focus on.

Incidentally, given that you're short of this stock, surely you'd be pleased that this has happened?

Pbow, point taken about Syria, but I'm afraid a cursory google search will lead you to millions of references to Mexico being described as a narco state. It may well be a nice place to go as a tourist, but I suspect many of its residents may disagree with you, which sort of explains why so many of them become illegal immigrants in the US. So I'm afraid it isn't 'ridiculous' to suggest it is.

Unwittingly, you've rather supported my argument about the UN. Have any of its actions stopped Syria producing Captagon? Sadly not.

For clarity, I'd much prefer us not to be having this conversation i.e I wish Mexico hadn't granted the convicted criminal asylum and on balance I wish Nobby hadn't done what he did. Stability is obviously better for us, but this is a developing nation in Latin America and its problems are far from unique. The issue for this bb is that one or two people, for their own ends, are trying to blow this out of all proportion.

SH, and what exactly will the UN do about it? It hasn't had much success in doing anything about Russia's invasion of the Ukraine, or China's continual harassment of its neighbours, has it? Or how about North Korea? Or Iran's promotion of armed conflict and its race to get nuclear weapons? The list of the UN's ineptitude goes on and on.

Do you imagine this issue will be top of their priority list? A nation seizes a criminal from the embassy of the world's largest narco state, doesn't exactly compare with the really awful things happening in the world, does it?

It would have been far better if Mexico hadn't given sanctuary to Glas, but it did so as a result of its ongoing political disagreements with Ecuador. Nobby could have held the moral high ground by allowing Glas to be given sanctuary in the cesspit which is Mexico, but he chose not to. A mistake? Probably. Apart from a 'slap on wrist' will there be long term consequences? Will the UN pass a unanimous vote demanding sanctions against Ecuador? No chance.

Pinot, this article must be fake - we all know no one will invest in Ecuador at the moment.

HfH, isn't there, just.

Noboa is doing his best to prevent the country from becoming a fully fledged narco state like Mexico, and he's enjoying a level of public support that would be the envy of any western politician. However, the situation in Guayaquil remains difficult, but he's not going to turn a blind eye to it. His actions are designed to prove to both his people and the international community, that Ecuador is not like its neighbours and we must hope the countries that really matter to Ecuador, America and China, continue to support him. America in particular, will not want another Mexico on its hands and although they will probably join those giving Noboa a 'slap in the wrist' (not my words, they appeared in one of the articles) the matter will blow over, no matter what a few people on here say.

However, I do agree with Eloro when he says he wants us to sell, but it must be done at the right price and a panic reaction will not achieve that.

Yesterday there are several interesting articles in Bloomberg and CNN about the situation which point out how the state of emergency was lifted on Monday and that Noboa's crackdown on cartels has bolstered his approval ratings. An analyst from Hxagon, who are political risk analysts, has also said he believes the noise surrounding the Mexican situation will blow over in a couple of weeks. It's widely anticipated that the deal with the IMF will go ahead as planned, particularly given the ongoing support of the USA.

Eloro, I know I've asked you before, but what should SC have done differently? Give the asset away for next to nothing?

I think the problem people have is that they believed Cascabel was 'oven -ready' and in a fit state to be sold - it quite clearly was not. Similarly, there was an assumption all was well within the company; again, it wasn't. In fact it was riven with division and disfunction. Our NEDs were patently useless and Twigger was totally hopeless. 0n that point, I wonder why we haven't got a new Chairman yet?

If you add to this the enormous complexity of the situation you can begin to understand what SC's doing and why it's taking so long.

SH, the only thing I recall you guessing correctly was that the company wouldn't have completed the SR by December, so well done for that.

SH, you're really setting yourself up for the potential of a gigantic kick in the balls. That's the problem with hubris, the fall is further and the pain greater.

You're always so certain, aren't you? Why can't you accept the truth, which is that not one of us knows what's likely to unfold? I'm afraid you're not in possession of special powers or stunning insight - you're in the dark, as are we all.

SH, I don't for one moment doubt that the current sp is a result of the funding issue. But, based upon what SC has said, I believe we'll have news on that fairly soon. In fact, there's no question we will - circumstances demand it.

Eloro, define 'tangible outcomes'. I would argue we've seen quite a few recently.

Let's face it, you're interested in one thing only (to be honest, so am I) which is a disposal. The difference between us is an understanding of where we've come from and what's required to deliver a good outcome. I don't want to see us throw away such an amazing asset and if that means there are still building blocks needed to provide that outcome, so be it.

Eloro, there's a difference between being happy with the current sp and understanding what SC's trying to achieve and realizing the amount of time required and complexity of what it involves.

Apart from a few rather unpleasant non-shareholding sadists, I don't imagine anyone is happy with the current sp - least of all SC.

Don't fret, Eloro, the pieces will fall into place soon.

So four significant announcements in March equates to a few crumbs, does it?

Eloro, yes, I suppose that's true - some people are very slow on the uptake.

Eloro, I think SC's given us a pretty clear steer as to what he's doing. How many times does he have to repeat it?

Jerry, perhaps at this stage of the game they don't feel it to be necessary.

Whatever they're up to at the moment is far more complex than a simple cash raise.

What's religion got to do with copper?

'84, you've got that right.