Member Info for addicknt

Bozi, yes, I think their shareholders are right to feel aggrieved - it's been sold for a song. Interesting to note both Marshall and Grant Goodie are non-execs.

No worries, nal. You make a fool of yourself every time you post, so one more is neither here nor there.

Fort, I pretty much agree with all of your 8:20 post, although I'm not sure the Special will pass - it all depends on what Newmont do. And I too hope they've got the message about needing to deliver shareholder value asap. If they don't, they won't have jobs this time next year.

Nal, I couldn't resist unfiltering you for this one.

You appear to believe you're invested in an Australian company. Sorry to disappoint, but the directors are employed by a UK registered plc and are subject to the UK Companies Act. It may also help if you read our Articles, which are also governed by UK law. Section 19 will tell you what you need to know.

Hope this helps.

Roxi, bear in mind the vote on re-election is advisory and, in theory, can be ignored by the Board. So if SC only gets 60% of the vote, he can legitimately argue he has the support of the majority. In practice it's a different matter, as Mather found out to his cost. If it's only BHP and a few disgruntled retail investors who vote against, the vote will be disregarded.

The one thing I don't understand is why Newmont would vote against. Why would they want more chaos at a critical time for the company? It doesn't make any sense.

Ship, the current non-exec directors, probably on the advice of major shareholders.

Roxi, no there would not be an EGM to approve a new board. Putting it bluntly, we'll get what we're given, and we may not like it.

Quite right, Jerry. People have short memories.

Fort, you ask the question, 'what are we?' The answer is simple. We're a company that's being prepared for sale.

As ever Fort, you don't know if something's been denied or not. You are simply projecting your own jaundiced view.

My point is, SC made a an important claim and I'd have liked to see some evidence to back it up. Something I'd have thought you wouldn't disagree with.

Smick, yes, it is - along with the rest of us. But the question is, what strategic moves have been denied to us?

If they were truly of significance to us retail investors and given the board is seeking our votes, why not demonstrate what it is we've missed out on? It may have persuaded a few of the doubters.

Prediction: The ordinary resolutions will pass, but the Special will not receive the required 75% approval.

It's interesting Caldwell said that over the past few years various value-enhancing strategic initiatives had been stymied by the failure to pass the dis-application resolution. If this is the case, why hasn't he provided some details so that shareholders may be in a better position to understand what he has in mind and why the resolution is so important?

'worth billions and billions'

'the Chinese don't care which country it's in...they will buy Solgold'.

Of course, he's talking his own book, but nevertheless this is a very interesting overview of the market, an explanation of why we are where we are and what he sees coming down the track.

Thanks for posting, Eloro.

We are producing a new PFS to increase our attractiveness to a larger group of buyers i.e the smaller and medium size miners who cannot fund and manage a truly large scale, multi-billiondollar development.

If this group of revenue producing miners with a track record cannot cope with such a project, how can we?

Anon, my argument is that we need obtain the various licenses, IPA etc first. The company needs to be in the strongest position before we get into detailed sale negotiations. There's no point trying to sell something which isn't yet saleable.

Mog, good point. Of themselves they're no threat, so I wonder who else is aligned to BHP?

If it was only BHP surely the Board wouldn't be concerned?

TI, perhaps more appropriately; "They're behind you!"

"Oh no they're not."

etc, etc.

It seems pretty obvious that there are now two entrenched opinions about our future; those who want a sale, as represented by the CGP mob and Mather, and those who want us to move towards production with a new Board. This seems to be the view of BHP and perhaps others - the Californian Teachers?

Given the nature of the relative shareholdings, we appear to have an impasse which rears its head at this time of year just like some terrible pantomime staring Christopher Biggins. How do we get away from this farrago? Because on thing's for sure; it's undermining any residual credibility just at the time we need it most i.e in our negotiations with the government. We cannot carry on like this.

The only answer I can think of is to make it crystal clear we are for sale ( I think most people know this already) and to make it equally clear to BHP that if they want to see this go all the way, they should make an offer. In other words, put up or shut up. We must force their hand.

For the past four years we've been in an appalling mess and are riven by division. This no way for a company with assets of of the quality we own, to progress. We must, and inevitably will, push the thing to a showdown and the way to do that is to allow SC to turn the company into an irresistibly attractive proposition.

The key question those thinking of voting against the resolutions should ask themselves is; why are BHP so opposed to the Board?

A clue: It isn't because they're concerned about the retail investor.

Remember what that bloke from Glencore said a month or so ago; 'the business model of the majors is to screw the small explorers.' And he wasn't joking.

Fort, indeed and I was the first person to point out the merger was a reverse takeover - and thank heavens it was.

You've become fixated on this issue of the CGP shares and I'm afraid I think you're talking nonsense.

Perhaps it's now time for you to 'get it into your head', if BHP end up packing the board they don't need to worry about votes, they'll simply be asked to stump up the equity to fund the development and you'll be sitting on the sidelines squealing like a stuck pig.