Member Info for addicknt

This is not relevant, but does anyone remember when Charlie Vincent and Ashley Levett of Winchester Commodities cornered the copper futures market? They cleared over £100m profit in the space of a couple of days. Their counter-party at Sumitomo ended up in the slammer. They were never found guilty of anything, although suspicion lingered.
I lived in the area at the time and our kids attended the same school. The car park to their office filled up with Ferraris, Lambos etc, even the secretary was rumoured to have bought one. Levett went on to buy many trophy assets, including providing the backing for the original Hotel du Vin in Winchester.
There you are, a bit of useless information for the weekend.

'81, you may have missed a question I asked you earlier, which was deleted along with the rest of the thread: Why are you so certain a deal will not happen this year? I don't recall seeing any explanation from you - merely the constant reiteration.
Is it simply the case you believe that due to timing it will take that long to complete a transaction post-SR? Or are their other reasons?

Magoo, not sure about the SR going AWOL. We've been told it will be completed by end June and personally, I'm not expecting any news prior to that ( I'll be delighted if something emerges beforehand, but I'm managing my expectations)
As for the other stuff, you're right; it's as if the company has been mothballed and although we've been told various things are ongoing, we've seen no evidence to suggest they are.
If nothing else, I was expecting to see something about closing various offices (London and Brisbane) and an explanation of further rationalization. Perhaps this will appear in the next MD&A?

All of them except number 10 - only a deranged lunatic would vote for that one. I like covering my bets.

Jerry, I take your point. My view is that we will see a re-rate before a deal is announced and the price will be based upon a premium to the re-rated price. Perhaps that process has already started.
Your final question is a good one. If BHP/NCM are not going to be interested they will nevertheless want a decent return on their investment and given they own 21% they are in a position to drive the price up. So the answer is yes.

Fort, I don't believe in filtering people - there's a good deal of entertainment to be had by not doing so.

needalife, good of you to display your ignorance so eloquently -read what I said. Suggest you consult the company's web site. Just for guidance, and you may not have noticed this, the share register has changed significantly in the past two years.
You've only been on here a few days and you've already taken the crown as the dimmest poster. Well done.

josepi, the company states 36.6% of the shares are held by 'other' shareholders i.e us and the various funds with non-declarable stakes.

Z, I wonder if WI had Barrick in mind when he talked about gold miners having to after copper/gold discoveries?

sean, I think that's a bit harsh on Q. I don't feel he's 'de-ramped' at all - he simply believes that production would provide better value in the long term and, being purely theoretical, it's possible he's right. The problem is in the real world production is simply not deliverable, so it's all a bit of a non-discussion.
Nor do I believe for one moment that his posts have persuaded anyone to sell-up, and if they did those investors must be incredibly dim.
Q may be many things and I most certainly wouldn't want to go for a beer with him (I suspect the feeling's mutual), but he isn't a negative influence on here - there are plenty of other people I could think of who fit that bill far more accurately.

Monte, I think NM's direct holding is 3%. DGR has 6.8% and Tenstar 4%. And Sangha is also an insider.

It's always helpful to see articles like this, but, in true Yahoo fashion, it's wildly inaccurate. "Insiders have 1.9% of the company" Hmmm. Didn't try that hard, did they?

Interesting comment from Irwin about gold miners having to buy copper projects in order to access the gold by-product.

Jerry, you and I have discussed this question in the past and I certainly understand your point. Do you think the same argument applies to GGP?

Sorry to disappoint, but I've never forecast a share price. Nor do I indulge in telling people good news is coming tomorrow.

needalfe, on the basis that 'the smart money went years ago', can we assume you are not a shareholder? If that's the case, you know what you can do.

We all know what was contained in the SR announcement and let's hope it does lead to the advancement of Cascabel, thereby adding value. Of course, the various stated aims of the SR are all stepping stones and are not of themselves a definitive statement that the company intends to take this to production. Indeed, as far as I can see no such statement was made.
Three of the four bullet points are relatively specific, however, the fourth point - " any other transaction or series of related transactions" demonstrates just how wide-ranging the SR is, and is the catch-all which says we are open to all possibilities.
I recognise a jv is a possibility, although god knows how this would provide a short term shareholder return, but it's also important to recognise that the fourth bullet point encompasses the possibility of a sale of Cascabel and given what our CEO and advisors have said, the balance of probability lies with an exit.

Smick, the naysayers conveniently ignore these facts - it doesn't chime with their narrative.

GT, I can assure you that had this been news the bb would have had a coronary.

Must have missed it.