Member Info for addicknt

Actually SH, I said it was merely a theory (check the relevant post). It was not a definitive statement. And btw, none of us know if it's true or not. If you don't think it's likely, fair enough, but don't pretend you have the answer.

"I reckon..." In other words, an opinion. Earlier on you were claiming I won't countenance any other opinions, and yet here you are - again- doing exactly that. Talk about hypocrisy.

Bozi, agreed.

Incidentally, have you found a comment from me on the consolidation issue? Because I can't see one.

What utter nonsense. You're getting as bad as your Aussie mate. Your posts are consistently negative and how you could deny that is beyond me. Let's not forget your Corporal Jones moment last week, which ranked right up there with just about the most stupid post of all time.

Anyway, carry on Corporal.

Eloro, fair enough, however, I don't think I did comment when you first posited the suggestion, although I'm happy to be corrected.

The point is that at the moment most of your posts tend to see something and then place a negative stance on it. However, in this instance, you'll note that I went on to say I agreed with your observation about a share consolidation.

Rcgl, he saw it on a Canadian chat board and read it as gospel. According to DBW, Maxit have denied it.

However, he's right to say it's a bad idea. I suspect that over the years most of us have seen companies do this and it's usually a sign of desperation and a vain attempt to demonstrate that a business isn't a bombed-out penny stock. In fact it ends up reducing liquidity and making the stock even less attractive to the retail investor. Fortunately, one sees far fewer of them these days as history has proven them to be nothing more than a futile exercise in window dressing.

Btw, someone on the GGP page posted a link to an interesting Rick Rule interview. The second half concentrates on uranium, so is probably of less interest. However, in the first half he talks about exploration stocks and gold investments. It's worth a listen.

HfH, there's nothing wrong with being positive about your investments. In fact, it seems very strange that anyone would remain invested in a situation which they believe to be a basket case.

The irony of the position of the negative posters on here is that they don't seem to understand that SC is trying to achieve exactly what they want him to do i.e secure a monetizing event. It's been said enough times, but he inherited a bad situation - probably worse than anyone thought - and, just like any business, it's a complex tangle with many nuances. For me the December AGM is the end date. Two years is sufficient and if he hasn't delivered by then the discussion will change.

This is absolutely hilarious.

You spend all your time calling people liars when they report communication with the company or associated parties, and yet here you are trumpeting your own. Do you not see the irony? (And we haven't forgotten your claim that a mate at the bowls club had told you a deal was about to happen. When was that? A year ago?)

Anyway, putting that embarrassment to one side, how about asking him about his third paragraph? Perhaps you could take the opportunity to tell him nothing has changed and he's talking rubbish.

Orthern, no denying that. The board completely lost sight of its core competences and tried to pursue an unattainable dream. And Mather's hubris didn't help.

BBG, where did this quote come from?

Why don't you try emailing him yourself? Provided your message makes sense, you'll find he's more than happy to respond - as others on here have found. Equally, Fawzi was good at responding to messages, albeit he only ever gave stock replies. Sadly, since he left, shareholder communication has become rarer. I have never contacted Sangha or SC, but am happy to believe others when they say they have.

You constantly bang on about this issue, but you've never bothered to try it. Is that because you're too lazy, or are you afraid you'll be proved wrong?

So, before you make your claims again, give it a go.

No, he doesn't decide on appointments. As I pointed out yesterday, he's one of three people who do so. And no, the Appointments Committee doesn't oversee the CEO, the whole board does. You'll get there in the end.

In any event, apart from a new chairman, how many appointments are happening at the moment? The answer appears to be none. Incidentally, given the shift in the axis of power within the company, what's the betting the new chairman, if we get one, isn't Australian? A Canadian seems likely.

I realise Mather's lost you a lot of money, both here and at DGR, but you are obviously obsessed by the guy. If I were you I'd move on to the more important things the company's doing.

Btw, you still owe me an apology for last weeks egregious lie.

I'll help you out as you appear not to understand the situation.

NM is one member of a three man Appointments Committee. The other two represent the change in influence which occurred when the merger/reverse takeover took place. Mather can be out voted at any time. He does not serve on any of the other board committees.

But let's put your misunderstanding to one side and focus on the important bit, which is that Mather had a sea change of opinion and is now on the same side as SC in his wish to sell the company/Cascabel. This has been fully detailed in DC's court submission. As much as you like to think Mather is calling the shots, he's actually working with the new team and shares their strategic goals. Incidentally, he's got his work cut out trying to salvage the mess at DGR, which I imagine is taking up most of his time.

Hope this helps.

Fort, fair enough. But my point was that a deadline already exists, so we didn't need a new one. Anyway, the sooner it arrives, the better.

Orthern, the deadline for the PFS is end Q1 and that appears to remain unchanged.

Interesting to note no news on a new chairman.

Eloro, I agree with you about the SR, but I guess he's trying to avoid becoming a hostage to fortune.

I imagine this announcement is a response to shareholders requesting an update on the recent unrest. What appears to be clear is that life is continuing as normal for SC and the relevant government agencies.

Eloro, sorry to say the RNS disproves your theory about SC remaining in Canada, and it's good to hear he's having 'productive meetings' with government officials.

Corporate update. Nothing earth shattering, but we are nearing completion of the PFS and the SR is continuing.