Member Info for addicknt

SH, a 'quick sale' (I'd dispute that description) does not require 'desperate bidders'. A process is being followed by Maxit and Citi which, due to our recent fund raising, can be completed without a gun to our heads.
The potential buyers are not desperate, but they are interested in expanding their copper activities - indeed, BHP have been very vocal in describing copper as fundamental to their future, and they are very far from being alone.
To conclude, I don't accept your central premise.

SH, given your view that nothing will happen and that life will be the same this time next year, may I ask what you think the purpose of the SR actually is? Do you believe the new management team will do nothing to change the direction of the company?
Are Sangha's comments nothing more than wishful thinking? And for that matter, NM's comments relating to DGR's holding.
Are we to conclude that all of the recent events are really no more than a facade?
All of the available evidence suggests a very significant shift in direction, and yet you appear to dismiss this as no more than flim-flam and bluster. Why?

RK, I completely agree with your argument and understand why Jiangxi invested.
Similarly, I can understand why some people have become disillusioned and pessimistic, but in my view they may have lost sight of what we own. I do not agree with Orthern's pessimism about the asset - we have only to look at those who've done their dd and decided to invest. If it was not everything we believe it to be, we wouldn't have raised a penny.

RK, I'm pretty sure it's because they love throwing their money away.
On a serious note, it would be fascinating to know what they've been told so far about our strategy. Obviously they'll know all about the SR, but the key element will be what we 've said to them about their role.
Have we said to them this will provide you with a foot in the door when the exit process begins? Have we given them first right of refusal on an informal basis?

Q, it will simply be your valuation and will have no bearing on what other people think.
This is the problem with attempting to assign a value to companies - ultimately it doesn't depend on spreadsheets...it's what people are prepared to accept.

Q, as ever, your argument hinges on the definition of "full value". The problem being that no one has any idea what that is, including you.
I'm not going to address the 'diverse book' stuff again - we've gone over it far too many times.

Q, just out of interest, how do you think NCM would react if a takeover was launched and accepted by 75%, of shareholders? Would they cash-in, or continue holding in a private company where their voice would be irrelevant. Bear in mind, the new owners would dilute them out of sight.

You seem a bit tetchy this morning, Red. Bad night?

RK, I think you'll find Not2's comment was rhetorical. You missed the context.

It's interesting to note how a number of posters have turned pessimistic recently. This seems odd, given what's going on.
If nothing was happening and the board were still wittering on about being the next BHP, I could understand it - but they're not.

DBW, I agree with that. They've made it crystal clear - hence my bemusement at the share price.

orthern, given the recent investment from our Chinese and Canadian friends, I'm not sure we're in that situation. In fact, quite the opposite.

orthern, how long is a piece of string? (when you think about that expression it's really quite stupid)
One of the key determinants here will be how far they were already advanced in any ongoing discussions with potential buyers. Additionally, are they really examining all the options, or have they already decided upon the direction of travel?
Not a very helpful answer, but the fact is we're totally in the dark.

Ha! I can understand if the background to the announcement is that the company is in trouble and the SR is the final throw of the dice of a worthless business, but that doesn't describe our situation.

We must have had different experiences.

the only company in history to announce a strategic review which is then followed by a falling share price? Odd, isn't it?

Bozi, understood and you make a fair point. I think we're on the same page with regard to the sale of Cascabel?

If we're going to sell Cascabel I'm not sure why we need to spin-out the regionals into Newco. In fact, we don't. Why go to that trouble and expense? We'll still be holders in SOLG plc and can benefit from any future upside. And if we want to save a bit of cash we can drop our TSX listing, which, in any event, is totally superfluous.
I think I saw a post suggesting we should move Cascabel into a Newco with the rest remaining under the SOLG banner. This is definitely a non-starter as it creates no immediate shareholder value, which is what CGP and co are demanding.
For me, the only discussion to be had is whether we sell the company or Cascabel alone. And before making my mind up I'd like to see what both propositions look like i.e if we sell Cascabel, how much of the cash is going to be returned to shareholders. Anything less than 90% would not get my support.

Q,
1. I recall saying the 'gloves would be off' after the end of the BHP agreement - not that we would be sold by Christmas. I was right, as the subsequent agm proved.
2.Wrong.
3. Wrong.
4. Correct.
The events you've mentioned have proved to be critical milestones in our journey, all of which are leading us towards the inevitable outcome. I note you believe production is still the 'most likely outcome'. Good luck with that.

Q, a quick correction if I may.
I've not 'tried' to say that you've argued production is a certainty, I've said it definitively and without equivocation...for the simple reason you have...ad nauseum. It's only in recent months you've begun to back pedal.