Member Info for addicknt

Earley brothers, Spurway, Ware and Biggar.

So far there have been no charges in relation to Whetstone, which may surprise some.

It's interesting that covgaz completely misunderstood what Aquinaga said and yet two people have recommended his post.

China has proven itself to be perfectly content to invest in unstable countries - you've only got to look at some of the basket cases in Africa for proof. They are the personification of long term investors and are working to a global strategic plan which puts us in the West to shame. I very much doubt they'll be put-off by the events of the past 24 hours.

Magoo, does that imply you don't believe the new team will be any different? If so, I think you're wrong. They need to be given time.

NAL, so you blame him, do you?

I don't think you can blame him for the political disruption. Similarly, we have no idea what the SR will reveal. So, it probably makes sense to reserve judgement on his performance.

It appears all of the work currently being undertaken by the company is desk-based and largely being conducted elsewhere (heaven knows what our on-site employees are doing), you'd assume any short-term disruption caused by current events will not effect us. We are also led to believe the local community supports our efforts and needs the income provided by us. We also know we are not in a protected area.

Obviously, political upheaval doesn't help, but to the extent that anything is secure in Ecuador and on a scale of risk, you'd think Cascabel is at the less risky end of the spectrum. I suppose my argument is you can't tar every mining prospect with the same brush.

Personally, I'm slightly surprised we haven't seen an announcement from the company, although it's early days and I'm sure they're trying to get as much info as possible before commenting.

It appears elections will be held within the next 90 days and whoever is elected will govern until May 2025, which was the date when Lasso's term of office was due to expire.

Hopefully he'll use a Presidential Decree to give us the various green lights we require.

There are elements of truth in both Quady's and nal's arguments, it's just a shame neither can accept it.

Like so much of our public debate, nuance has flown out of the window. Opinions become totally entrenched with the result that the discussion collapses into a stinking heap.

An investment case is rarely black and white and that is particularly true here. Any sensible investor would know that and would keep an open mind - sadly, we seem to have gone way beyond that position.

Open your minds, gentlemen - if you don't you're unlikely to succeed as an investor.

Thanks hfm.

Thanks Q.

I don't use Twitter - what did hubris say?

Nal, you obviously didn't read my post.

The goldstocks.com web site is owned by a marketing, advertising and pr company in British Colombia, which makes me wonder who placed the article? Was it us? If so, the specific reference to the Chinese is, erm, interesting. Or was it Maxit?

It does read like a bit of pr fluff, which in turn raises a few questions. In London the past masters at this sort of thing are Rothschild. When they're marketing a business they are infamous for leaking it to the press in order to prise any interested parties out of the woodwork. It's surprisingly successful.

Btw, I'm not complaining.

We have to find $192m by the end of the year to fund our commitments under the IPA. This is not going to happen. So I can only assume this is a critical part of the ongoing discussion/renegotiation. In any event, I wonder how they decided on the 430m figure in the first place - was it plucked out of thin air? It seems excessive and arbitrary.

There's an awful lot which could be said about our current situation, but one thing's for sure - the SR really MUST deliver some solutions.

SM, sadly, yes. Total fees of $15m for the merger. These things don't come cheap

I wonder if Citi are still on the case and how much their monthly retainer is?

Following this MD&A do you feel 1) more confident 2) less confident 3) your opinion is unchanged?

Do you feel the new team is more ,or less open?

Do you feel it has provided more, or less clarity?

This was their first opportunity to explain themselves and I'm trying to work out whether they've done so clearly. My gut feel is that it revealed a bit more than normal, but we will continue to be largely in the dark until the SR emerges (btw, I couldn't find any repeated reference to the end June deadline previously mentioned)

Incidentally, I was amused to read the description of employees as having been 'severed'. Obviously, not amused that they lost their jobs, but by the brutal use of the word. No gentle touchy-feely UK HR boll***s.

Q, that's a reasonable question and I don't have an answer. My suspicion is we do not. In fact, given we've completely stopped work on the DFS, I can see no way we could raise the sort of sums necessary.

Sorry, my last sentence wasn't clear. I meant the licensing approvals have to happen this year, which in turn will clear the way for a realisation once they have been granted.