Member Info for addicknt

"I'm beginning to think you should have to take a small exam on how trades work before you can post on here"
Oh dear, that'd rule me out straightaway. Haven't got a fecking clue.

2Luke, I think you're quite right. My mistake.

Q, I know you place a great deal of emphasis upon evidence. As far as the $1bn is concerned, the company never provided any - from memory it was a comment made by Ingo and nothing more.
My guess is that he'd had meetings with various potential funders and they expressed an interest, but caveated that interest by saying "come back when you've got something tangible" i.e the BFS. In my opinion there never were any firm commitments - they would have released an RNS if there had been and expressions of interest do not amount to done-deals.

mister, it is a puzzling question, but my view is that given the board knew a change of direction was about to happen, they didn't want further dilution and only saw the royalty deal as a short term fix to plug the cash flow situation.
Obviously, in any subsequent deal a buyer will take note of the arrangement and will reduce the price accordingly, but I'm guessing our lads believe that will be less painful for shareholders than issuing a load of new shares.

DBW, I think that makes a great deal of sense. NM's silence at the moment is very interesting and one can only assume he's happy with the direction of travel.

Q, that is true, but is it really likely? As for the 'go it alone' argument and all the stuff about how easy it would be to fund the development with minimal dilution - I take it you now realise it was never deliverable?
Did anyone really believe the company when it said it had $1bn already committed?
I'm afraid to say you're fighting a rearguard action at the moment, and I assume you understand just how much has changed in recent weeks?
It seems we are now being led by people who have the best interests of small shareholders in mind - and I'm guessing that should make you very happy?
Who knows where this will lead us, but the recognition of reality is the best thing that's happened for a very long time.

mister, at this stage I don't think they have anyone lined-up - although I'd love to be proved wrong. And if this flurry of pr is designed to poke BHP/NCM, so what? That's exactly what we want.

over in Oz, Clara Resources (Mather and Moller) have increased their holding in DGR. I can't imagine why!
A lighthearted aside: During WW2 my father fought in a special forces regiment and although he told me very little about his experience, he did say the best soldiers he fought alongside were the Canadians. All these years later I can see why he thought that!

of the many interesting snippets in the article is the revelation of DC's position.
It says he left due to the sudden decision to push the button and that he wanted a much slower approach to the whole process.
In other words, despite having signed-up to the SR, he was only paying lip-service to the agreement with CGP and didn't appear to have any intention of supporting a short term partial or full exit. This unravelled remarkably quickly and it's obvious he'd lost the support of the board. In my opinion, he will not be missed, which is a pity as I had high hopes when he was first appointed. Oh well, I suppose he'll be quite happy spending his $1m, so I won't be shedding too many tears.

Sorry , smick not stick.

Stick, he must be on the same page.

The thing which is amazing about what's going on is the speed with which the situation has changed. It's also stunning how Sangha has re-positioned himself from shouting from the sidelines to being in the driving seat.
A stunning corporate coup.

"Slow and stupid"! I believe the modern expression is LOL.
It's gratifying to know these people are slowly catching up with those of us on this board who've been saying it for years.

"...pretending they are going to build a block cave".
Blimey! What a terrible surprise!

DBW thanks very much. Really interesting stuff.

Any chance of the full article?

Q, my point was about BHP's general strategy - I don't recall mentioning solg. But as you've raised the point it won't surprise you to hear that I fundamentally disagree with you.
I understand why you're pursuing this argument - because you believe it supports your narrative. However, if you step away from the specific for a moment, you'll understand what I'm saying.

Q, I think you're rather missing my point.
He's in a competitive environment and, as I said, if he wants to be successful he needs to react to what's going on around him. He's trying to steal people's assets on the cheap, but the demand for copper makes that an almost impossible task. If he wants good quality opportunities, he'll need to pay. I assume you agree with that?

Set against the backdrop of the long term demand for copper and the shortage of opportunities, each time Henry makes statements about not over-paying and being unwilling to pursue offers, he damages his credibility.
He would be well advised to keep quiet on this issue and to keep his powder dry. If he really wants to fulfil his strategic objective of greater copper exposure, and given the fact there's a lot of competition out there, he needs flexibility and by making these emphatic statements he's making himself look silly.
The best corporate strategists keep their cards close to their chest.

Thanks, BP.
What we're seeing is the real impact of failing to raise cash in the summer, the consequences of which have kicked off this whole process...so probably no bad thing!