Member Info for addicknt

Bozi, there's no one else to trust, is there?
Just out of interest, given you've become very pessimistic, why are you still holding? Genuine question.

Q, no, you may not.

that when I opened the Stock Exchange web site this morning and saw an announcement from the board with the headline "Corporate update", my heart sank.
Normally, this headline is the precursor to bad news and in this instance my thoughts immediately turned to the possibility of the merger being called off, or the failure of the funding deal. So I was pleasantly surprised to read everything was on track.
However, as soon as I saw the DFS was being delayed I knew the market would react badly. It doesn't matter what the context is, the market without fail wets its collective knickers over that one word. If a company said it had delayed committing suicide, the market would react badly and mark the shares down accordingly.
We know why it's being delayed - because we've taken the trouble to unpick the RNS - today's sellers have made no such effort.
Fortunately, the impact could have been worse, but I really do wish companies could dream up another word for "delayed". Or in our case, I really wish our board would take action to make sure they never have to again...it's become far too boring. Go on! surprise us...deliver something on time for once!

Bozi, indeed, but I find it hard to believe Sangha and co are going to throw it away for pennies.

Orthern, I don't disagree with that.
As you say, mismanagement has been a hallmark of the company for a long time. NM is a buccaneering entrepreneur with a skill for exploration, but not necessarily the right person for the next stage. I also think he lost sight of his own strengths and fell victim to hubris. Everyone since him utterly failed to provide a clear path and tried to straddle two horses, which the market simply didn't believe was possible.
Thank heavens we now have some clarity. Now it's down to Sangha and co to prove they can deliver. God knows what happens if they don't.

orthern, and that stank, particularly when you bear in mind his utterly obscene remuneration. Completely unwilling to put money where his mouth is.

anon, the direct answer to your question is that companies very, very rarely publicly proclaim they are for sale. A strategic review is a euphemism for a sale process and is used by many companies. Everyone knows what it means.

RK, I'm not sure that's entirely the case. The penultimate paragraph may imply some drilling, but it's highly ambiguous.

anon, as I pointed out earlier, he is still described as the "Interim CEO" and there's no reference to finding a full-time replacement. Why do you think that is? As I also pointed out, there's absolutely no hint we're looking for a full- time CFO.
How does a company expect to be taken seriously in the long-term if it doesn't have full-time people occupying those two roles?

Q, the words "direct" or "indirect" don't mean what you think.
A "direct" sale would be the disposal of Cascabel as a stand-alone entity; an "indirect" sale means the sale of the share capital of SOLG PLC.

Q, indeed and I accepted that possibility as soon as the SR was announced. What it most certainly does not mean is a route to independent production. I think you'd have greater peace of mind if you simply moved on from that opinion.

anon, I agree, this is unjustifiably cheap - but there's a good reason for that.
The announcement of the SR is the single thing which changes everything and is a very clear statement to the market that things are going to change, a fact Caldwell made crystal clear in his opening sentence.
The clues are all there and at some stage in the New Year we will hopefully have a few bob in our pockets with which to enjoy our dotage!

Q, I've read it word by word and I understand what's being said. Perhaps you could explain the "shift in direction" comment from Caldwell? Do you believe that what he really means is that we're going to continue as before?

Bozi, interesting comment about this being a fire sale. In part you are right, but the reason for that is the previous management's patently absurd ambitions to take this to production as an independent entity.
The reason I say you're only partly right is that it's very important not to lose sight of just how valuable our asset is. People will want it and a sale process only needs two very aggressive potential buyers to make an auction a tasty prospect.

Stack, you're in denial. Mind you, you're not alone.

anon, do you not agree that things have changed?
What do you think the merger and strategic review are actually for? Why would you need a review which simply concludes that production is the way to go? Why do you think Sangha, who appears to be the catalyst for all of this, is so bullish about the prospects for an exit? And bear in mind he's conducting the review and will be a significant shareholder in the merged entity.
Life is now very different and any residual dreams some people may still harbour about independent production are now firmly in the trash bin.

josephi, the critical figure is 51%. If someone bids and receives acceptances for that percentage they have control of the business and can do what they want. The big stick to persuade others to accept is the threat to take the company private and this usually has the effect of pushing more shareholders to take the money. Very few people want to be trapped in a private company with absolutely no voice or control.
In my opinion, a bidder would get the 51% here without breaking sweat.

important to note that Caldwell will retain the description of "Interim CEO". There is no mention at all of an ongoing search process for a full-time replacement. Nor has there been any suggestion of looking for a full-time CFO.

DBW, yep.

The previous "direction" had been DFS, fund raising and then production...the infamous Plan A.
So, now we have "shifted".
It's not that difficult to understand, is it?