Member Info for addicknt

Same as you, although I have no interest in a jv.

At the moment I take the view definitive statements are futile and not one of us knows any more than others.

Changing the subject slightly, I assume there must have been a reason we've appointed this bloke and I assume that's because he's good at his job and has a strong track record. Time will tell.

Stack, based upon what we've read recently - the DC court submission - I'd say both arguments are equally possible.

Just out of interest, on what basis did you invest? Probable or possible? Given your comment, I assume you thought it was probable?

NMM, I share your frustration but am prepared to support him for another 12 months. He's our best bet.

Stack, I don't disagree, but the fact remains that my scenario is equally possible. Currently, we have no way of knowing - just like so much else.

Btw, I also agree about that email and his ants analogy, which sounded as if it came from a third rate MBA course.

Eloro, I think your antipathy towards SC is based upon a misunderstanding of what he inherited, the strategic goals he's set out and the length of time needed to deliver them. It isn't an easy task.

It was quite clear from the AGM that he has virtually unanimous support from the shareholders who voted and is opposed by a statistically irrelevant number of holders. Surely that tells you something?

I'm not sure about your view of the IR appointment. It's equally possibly they've been taken on to familiarise themselves with the business prior to corporate action when their services will be required.

Poor old nal, he's now reduced to copying cautionary notes, the like of which are entirely standard and, in one form or another, are produced by every quoted company. The poor bloke must be desperate. Mind you, it was only a couple of weeks ago that he was telling us we're invested in an Australian company.

NMM, I sent an email on this topic this morning. I'll let you know if I get a reply.

How close, Q? We haven't even got a PFS that works, let alone a DFS.

Btw, your comment about being able to issue shares at a higher price is incorrect, but I do agree with your opening sentence.

If he starts giving us any more folksy stuff about termites or wasps we're all totally fecked.

Bozi, agreed. What utter tosh.

Let's hope he's cheaper than Fawzi!

That's an interesting development and thanks for the background info, SM.

BBG, you're quite right, but I object to being misrepresented and subjected to his lies.

Nal,

1) re Tribunal. I made absolutely no reference to a link between the news flow and the tribunal. It's just your fevered imagination.

2) Where did I say I have knowledge of what's going on? Evidence please.

I think I've come up with a solution to your comprehension issues: A while back you told us you and your family sit around your computer and have a good old laugh at what people post on here. (I'll put to one side just how bloody weird that is. Has it not occurred to you they might be laughing at you? Perhaps when they get in the car to drive home they wonder how long it'll be before they have to find a care home for you...somewhere deep in the Outback so they don't have to visit you every Sunday) Anyway, perhaps you could ask one of your grandchildren to sit with you and read out the posts with helpful explanations of what they actually mean? I'm sure life would become more agreeable for you.

Nal, it may come as a surprise to you, but I agree with your cash point, although you may recall what Sangha implied when he said we won't need to raise any more money. However, the reason I originally referred to it was because Eloro was portraying the issue as being of immediate concern. It isn't.

Nowhere did I suggest that news flow has stopped because of the tribunal. Your observation is yet another example of you being unable to understand what people actually say.

Your comment about BHP is simply meaningless.

I did not dismiss the lack of signed agreements as being irrelevant and if you'd read what I said you'd have understood that I said I too would have preferred to have the IPA signed asap.

Your latest post highlights precisely your problem - you don't read and comprehend what people actually say. You simply apply your own prejudice to your interpretation and then accuse others of being rampers, etc, etc. I'm afraid that reflects on you, not others.

p.s. I did have you filtered - you were the only one - but I don't like doing it, so I unfiltered you.

Eloro tells us we're in a calamitous situation. Am I the only person who doesn't see it that way? Or is he losing the plot?

Eloro, I don't have 'unbounded optimism' and I like to think I can be objective. There remain many hurdles, but it seems to me SC is trying to overcome them in a logical and systematic way.

The one thing I have absolutely no doubt about is that he, the board and our advisors are working towards what virtually all of us want - an exit. And bear in mind, holders of 2bn shares gave him an overwhelming vote of confidence, and we haven't seen that level of support for quite some time.

Eloro, you made some interesting statements and labelled them as facts.

1) Permit failed to turn up before Lasso departed. Which permit? Do you mean the IPA? Personally I don't recall any definitive statement being made in this respect. SC may have expressed the hope that we'd get something signed, but does that count as a promise? Obviously it would have been good to have something and I would hope we'd get some good news on this soon, but if you're trying to suggest our relationship with the government is not as good as has been stated, why did they extend the licence?

2) Bid expected. This was bb chatter, nothing more.

3) Cash needed before end Q1. Really? So when the company said it has cash up to end June without selling the CGP shares, was it lying?

4) We don't know what the relationship with BHP is at the moment, although you should note they didn't vote against Caldwell's reappointment.

5) Yes, it has been difficult for those who bought more shares at a higher level, but each and every one of us makes mistakes of timing, so I'm not sure it's anything to gloat about.

6) You complain about a lack of news flow and strategic direction. Really? It's been spelt out for us and confirmed by DC in his statement to the tribunal.

We are all frustrated, Eloro, but surely you can see what SC is trying to do?

Elor, no evidence there was a sell-off in Canada. In fact, as ever, there has been a very low volume of trades.

NMM, indeed. What the table does show is that Cascabel is the third largest deposit without a problem.

However, I think that's a bit simplistic, as we still have a number of approvals outstanding. Also, from our point of view the IPA is a "must have" and I'd rather hoped it would have been signed-off before the year end. What we do know is that we have government and local support...if only they'd move a bit faster!