Member Info for addicknt

Monte, a number of shareholders have shated details of email exchanges with NM and DV.

The Board said they were minded to recommend in order to avoid a hostile bid.

1) On Friday this looked like a done deal.

2) Various conversations with two of our directors have revealed it is very far from over.

3) We have a partial explanation as to why the board is 'minded' to recommend the offer.

4) Minded is very far from being a recommendation.

5) NM, and we can assume DV and PS, will be pursuing all available options over the coming days.

6) A number of shareholders have scheduled calls with DV. He and NM appear happy to use these shareholders to disseminate info to the rest of us. In my experience this unusual.

This is far from over, although there's no guarantee of success.

The coming weeks are going to frenetic for the senior team and hugely interesting for us. In the meantime, it makes no sense to sell now.

RT, NM's words suggest he's given up on the idea of an independent future. Only one question remains: Can the Board create competitive tension?

Triplestar, is this AI generated?

Eloro, until I read the various messages which have emerged from some of our Board members, I thought it was game over.

Now we've heard a bit more I'm no longer so sure.

Eloro, it's not just NM who's engaged in trying to get an auction going, he said "we".

DBW, yes, I did, and thank you very much. Interesting stuff!

Fort, I'm not sure you have a legitimate gripe regarding DV and PS and JCC's involvement.

They inherited the arrangement and the additional placing was, in effect, forced on them by a lack of funds. Bear in mind, SC had already agreed to sell them the shares and had the opportunity to do so at a much higher price, but failed to do so.

PS was quite clear he understood the threat and was intent on avoiding a sale of Newmont's shares to them, which so far they haven't.

Mistermeister, there was a lot of discussion about this and eventually the company said we would not be affected by the Canadian restrictions. I can't see why Canadian shareholders would have a problem now as this is a UK plc with its main asset domiciled in Switzerland.

"Minded" is an open admission to others that the board welcomes competing bids.

Incidentally, NM also said he regrets what's happened and would have preferred to remain independent. Again, an admission our days are numbered.

RT, it certainly doesn't sound as if it is.

" The name of the game here now is to get an auction going with alternatives and we are working on that"

These are NM's words in an email reply to another shareholder and posted on Telegram.

Seems they are most certainly not giving up.

It's worth having a look at the voting process and various thresholds which are neccesary under a Scheme of Arrangement. It's different to a normal tender offer.

If you weren't such a bone idle, useless thicko whose only excitement in life is if the binmen don't turn up on Tuesday, you'd have picked up the fact multiple shareholders have been hearing the same thing.

DBW, it certainly sounds if the old bugger isn't finished yet.

The Board is definitely aware of retail unhappiness and appear not to be happy themselves, which begs the question why did they bother to say they are "minded" to recommend the offer? They didn't have to.

I also wonder have they already tested the market, or has this caught them unawares, so they're in that process now?

A poster over there has corresponded with NM and he got a fascinating response.

To summarize, he's not happy and it isn't over. But that doesn't explain why he's backed the offer.

Has covered the story, but has nothing new - apart from a photo of what we're giving away.

Mistermeister, that's a fair point. Nothing about this makes sense and yet lurking in the background lies an explanation. And it isn't that 28p represents a compelling offer.

We'll all be scratching our heads until the offer document is released, in which a section will explain the rationale for the deal. However, I very much doubt it'll address the true reason behind this capitulation. We'll probably never know.

NMM, you're right about the cash position, although I suspect our burn rate has been high. I wonder if it was about visibility of future funding? As you say, we've got a long way to go to satisfy the Tranche 3 requirements. However, our relationship with Franco was said to be very good - they've used us as the poster boy in many presentations - so surely we could have worked something out with them?

Absolutely nothing about this makes sense, apart from the one fact most of us have known for years: The project was simply way too big for us to handle.