Member Info for addicknt

Rich, I really hope so. It would make a refreshing change.

DBW, you're absolutely right, both have their merits. However, I'm really not sure this will be contested and therefore all info will be shared with a bidder during negotiations, so does it matter if it's already in the public domain?

LM, it seems as if they're being true to their word i.e no more announcements until the PFS is released.
I can guarantee the RNS will pop-up on June 27th...because I'll be holiday at that time.

LM, well, as it stands it most certainly won't be 'Russian state sponsored'. In any event, I don't want to be paid in roubles...not that they can actually buy anything at the moment...apart from North Korean fashion garments.

I wouldn't. 10p represents a lot of money of money to me. And frankly, I don't give a monkeys who ends up owning this provided they pay a good price.
It's not a question of regarding them as 'my mates', I simply see them as the most obvious party likely to make me a decent return.

CD, one is perfectly legal, the other isn't. And by the way, anything they do to stir-up a bit of excitement is fine by me.

CD, BHP will not break the law in an attempt to build up stock. They are not some back street outfit run by spivs. Any dealings through related parties has to be declared.
It's a nice idea, but it ain't happening.

SM, agreed.

No matter how much money you make on Poly, my opinion remains exactly the same. Your morality stinks. Mind you, you're not quite as bad as some on that bb (and EUA), specifically that truly awful individual Dribbles. Gloating in the abject misery being endured by the people of Ukraine caused by the vile Putin, whilst rubbing your hands with glee at the profits you're reaping. Truly sickening.

Clearly, CGP will sell before their liability crystalizes and the only buyer will be a company which is looking to purchase SOLG in its entirety. They are walking a tightrope, but are obviously confident they'll get a return.

Bozi, I came to this way of thinking by donning my corporate finance hat...albeit badly worn and moth eaten.
As you'll be aware, the absolute key to any acquisition process is information. As it stands BHP will not be privvy to the information they need and the best route to getting this will be the PFS. If they really are contemplating a hostile bid ( which I'm reluctant to believe), their position will be immeasurably strengthen by the publication of the document.

Bozi, some good points there. Do you think the MJ article was merely journalistic fiction? That is not a loaded question, by the way.

Bozi, for once I believe what the company has told us with regard to the pfs.
Clearly you are sceptical of my possible explanation as to why BHP haven't bid, which is fair enough as I only put it out there as a hypothesis...obviously, Q thinks it's just 'tosh'. Do you have your own thoughts as to why they haven't bid yet?

Bozi, the central premise of your argument is that the company has been deliberately delaying the pfs for strategic reasons. I do not believe this to be the case, specifically because I see no benefit in so doing.

Q, by definition the sp will represent a percentage of NPV.

DBW, yes, you'd assume we're building up a stockpile of news to be employed if there's a hostile bid...at least I hope we are. I can't see any other reason to withhold news.

There has been much speculation as to why BHP have not yet bid and why the MJ article suggested they will wait for the PFS and, as yet, none of us have come up with a convincing argument. So, how about this:
In the absence of a proper evaluation of the worth of Cascabel, they know that if they bid before it's released one of the central planks of our defence would be that their bid undervalues the company. Once it's been released and the market has reacted one way or another, it will provide a valuable benchmark for an initial offer. Our defence then becomes much more fragile and BHP would be able to point to the sp and claim, with some legitimacy, that the market has determined what it's worth. So, they wait a little while to see where the price settles and then launch a bid with say a 20% uplift.
I'm sure they'll be interested in our plans for mining as well, but that's not as important as a market valuation.

That's also my thinking, although I think there was talk of an uplift in the IRR.

Q, it was the context in which the comment was made that's important. He was answering a question about the potential for the sale of the company and he, quite rightly, referred to the best way to create shareholder value in those circumstances.
I think it's also worth bearing in mind the events of last year. We came to agreements with three of our main shareholders; CGP, BHP and NCM. CGP were persuaded to drop their activist stance and in return were offered an understanding that the company would maximise shareholder value, which, given we know they are sellers, can only mean one thing. This agreement appears to be holding.
However, this is not the case with BHP and NCM, where quite clearly the detente failed, and in pretty quick order. In fact the failure was so spectacular that our board felt it appropriate to castigate BHP in public, which was a bold move, to put it mildly.

Indeed, Quady. Let me think, what did the CEO say a couple of weeks ago? Oh, yes; "Plan A begets Plan B".