Member Info for addicknt

Q, quite possibly, but two things make me feel otherwise: the fact that, one way or another, we're due some important news and, that it's taking a long time to release it.
Still, who knows? I'm engaging in nothing more than idle speculation, as are we all.

Bubble, as I said, I have a suspicious mind...nothing more than that. Mind you, they've known about the need for an EGM since some time in April, so whatever it is that they're working on is obviously complex and important.

still no announcement. I do hope they're not planning to pull the stunt of releasing a bad RNS at the close of business ahead of an extended Bank Holiday.
Off hand, I can't think what bad news there could be, but I have a suspicious mind.

zoros, interesting thought about CGP, but they didn't ask our permission when they launched the ludicrous bid a couple of years ago, so I'm not sure they'd need to do so now.

LM, as you pointed out yesterday, the company already has plenty of scope to raise a significant amount of money without the need to ask shareholders again. Given that we don't have a DFS yet, it's also the case that we don't need more than the current authority allows.
I've reached the conclusion this is not about a fund raise.

It looks like every one of CD's posts have been removed. I guess he pushed his luck too far with the GGP boys.

Btw, my explanation of why we haven't had an RNS would also explain why the original date for the EGM was pushed back by a month. Makes sense, doesn't it?

DBW, to my fevered imagination this implies whatever it is we are being asked to vote on isn't yet ready for release. Were it a simple technical motion amending the Articles, or something similar, it would take no time at all and we could all go back to sleep. Alternatively, and in a more exciting dream, the company and its advisors are working feverishly to conclude negotiations on something world changing.
Take your pick.

There's nothing on the Stock Exchange site...yet. It must be of critical importance!

good posts over the weekend with people discussing the various possibilities in a reasoned and logical manner.
What's the betting we are all wrong and the EGM agenda will be nothing more than some arcane and tedious company law point, or some such, that needs to be included in our Articles?

Jerry, I've no idea if these instruments are still common, but I do know it would be disastrous for us.

Yes.

LM, how do you reach the figures you mention?

Rk, you may well be right. If so, it'll be interesting to see how BHP/ others react - unless of course they are in the loop and are fully supportive.

LM, you make a very good point about the notification process.
It seems very odd indeed that the company made no mention of it to the bulk of their retail investors ie those of us in the UK. And we're it not for the eagle eye of someone on here we'd be none the wiser.
This is, by definition, something 'extraordinary' and despite the fact it's been out there since 29th April, the company has told us feck all. I had hoped that the days of keeping us in the dark were long gone...it seems I was wrong.

DBW, yes, it looks that way. Interesting timing for the £1m purchase!

LM, as we know the company has already committed to the process of annual nomination, which will start at the December AGM. Therefore I'm not sure the EGM would relate to that particular issue.
I think we can rule out a bid for the entire company and I'm beginning to feel it's something to do with the fraud. So far only Jason has had to carry the can for this, which may, or may not, be fair (we have no way of knowing). Mather was running the company at the time and certain shareholders may feel this is an opportune moment to shift him off the board - although I'm not sure this would achieve much.
I can imagine that BHP/NCM and CGP were understandably very annoyed about the revelation - their public silence was telling, and I've no doubt they'll use this as a stick with which to beat the board.
I'm surprised this has just been dropped on us out of the blue. If the meeting was called as a result of a disgruntled major shareholder(s), I'd have expected there to have already been a public statement from the company explaining the situation before releasing the notice to call the meeting - although I'm sure we'll see something this week.
So my own musing lead me to believe this is either a move to get rid of Mather or, it's got something to do with Cascabel. I very much hope it's the latter.
Whatever the reason it's sufficiently important as to require shareholder approval and we should have an interesting few weeks, particularly if the proxy vote monkeys are employed to canvas our support again (unlikely as there isn't enough time).
Ho, hum - the joys of being a SOLG shareholder!

The headline suggests DGR don't know, which is strange. So many possibilities, DBW.

DBW, do you know what the article said? I'm not a subscriber.

DBW, the removal of a board director under those circumstances wouldn't require our vote. However a motion to remove the whole board would. Is it possible BHP have demanded such a move? If that was the case I'd have thought we would have seen something already.