Member Info for addicknt

Both Dan and Paul have said the reason they joined the company was that they saw it as a career defining opportunity. The question is; how do they define career defining?

I reckon they're aiming for a quid.

Just think what that would look like on their cv. They took over a company valued at sub 200m and turned it round to a position of being worth 3bn. They'd be the toast of the mining world and job offers would flood through the door.

There's a wonderful irony in all this. When Dan and Paul came on the scene, one of the first things they said was that the company had previously focussed too much on M&A, and they were going to do things differently. Eight months or so into their tenure, up pops a bid.

Pbow, thanks. Interesting stuff.

It says they're struggling to get consensus - well, that's hardly surprising, is it? If they offered a sensible price they may well get a different reaction.

I see they've also got a fairly substantial position in JCC.

Thanks, Barney.

I enjoyed the 8% probability attached to the standalone development path!

Tim, I did wonder. I'm not sure what DGR would bring to the party for the Saudi's.

Interesting article. Thanks for posting.

FTJNY, from the reaction on here, if the offer was designed to manage pi expectations, it's failed miserably.

They didn't want us to know about this punt, so I can't see how their intention was to manipulate us. Our lads revealed it for what it is, an opportunistic try-on, which has been firmly rejected.

FTJNY, I think you have a pretty low opinion of private investors. Bear in mind, the people who post on here represent a tiny minority of shareholders. And no, I wasn't looking for laughs.

DGR Global, billions?! They haven't got two brass farthings to rub together.

FTJNY, the thought of Mather, BHP or Newmont, Norge et al, being 'conditioned' doesn't strike me as being likely - in fact, there's not a chance.

48p was built on sand; 30p is not.

A comparison between 48p and current levels is misleading. We've had significant dilution since then and the fact is we're pretty close to the same market cap as we were back then.

However, our situation is completely different now and we are in a far stronger situation.

MF, re: your post at 21:24. I've no idea if they will or won't. On the face of it, what you say is perfect sense, but who knows how they see things at the moment?

I was told Newmont weren't interested in Cascabel, but liked the idea of ExCo, but that was six months ago, so things may have changed. BHP is a real mystery, particularly as they were such early investors. But everything I've heard and read seems to suggest they want producing assets. Bear in mind, they allowed themselves to be diluted and could have easily have had a go at us when we down at the 7p levels, but again, things have changed, so who knows? Perhaps they too want to see us de-risked before they make a move?

Whatever the current thinking is, I guess common sense says they'll sit back and see what JCC do before doing anything themselves.

We mustn't forget there are plenty of other fish in the sea and the one thing I fervently believe is that we will not be owners when this comes to production.

MF, you're right, sooner or later it will happen. I think the issue for us at the moment is that it's come too soon. JCC are trying to exploit our current undervaluation, which in turn is a result of not being sufficiently de-risked. Our optimal timing would be when we've ticked a few more boxes, and we all know what they are.

It's going to fascinating to see how this plays out, but I at this stage I can't see us recommending a deal from JCC because I don't believe they'll offer enough. The clear risk for them is that they'll have to pay more in due course, but that's their problem.

That's why it's used as a defence mechanism against a hostile bid. Once upon a time it didn't even require shareholder approval.

Bullion, we can sell or hive-off assets during an offer period, but it would require shareholder approval.

Thetriplestar, the spin-out option has been a popular solution for a long time on here, in fact, we were talking about it long before the company settled on the idea. The delay in announcing the details is, in my opinion, a result of the levy uncertainty.

FTJNY, I've maintained my expectation for this share for years and it has not changed. And it's a very long way from where JCC are now, or are likely to be if they make another offer. The idea of them 'conditioning' my view is, I'm afraid, laughable. I've been in this game far too long to fall for that sort of thing.

Fort, ha! I wouldn't go anywhere near 26p or 36p. I was asking about fiduciary duty, and the need to present an offer to shareholders, as I made perfectly plain.

But I maintain my view that it would be a bloody miracle if they came up with anything which is remotely close to my expectations.