Member Info for addicknt

Sorry, meant to say Solaris.

Fort, Pbow has posted some commentary from Sunstone on Telegram.

They make a very interesting observation about the size of the project, the investment required and their willingness( for that read need) to have a much bigger player involved.

It seems to me they are simply being realistic about a small company's ability, or lack of ability, to cope with a large project.

Q, I think you can safely say 99% of the population would fundamentally disagree with any such suggestion.

By the way, I disagree with your premise.

Q, have I understood you correctly? Are you suggesting there are currently no taxes on oil (petrol) and gas? And btw, I thoroughly object to subsidizing other people's transport choices.

Sniffer, you'd enjoy an article by Sir Richard Dearlove in this week's Spectator. He outlines just how dangerous net zero is for the UK from a security point of view. And he should know.

Monte, when they invested did we know it was going to be block cave? I can't remember.

Either way, I'm simply repeating what I was told.

Q, are you really suggesting we are currently de-risked? Surely, the various tasks being undertaken tells you we are not? And that's before we listen to the management telling us they're in the process of de-risking.

Apparently, the reason BHP haven't bid, and are unlikely to, is because they'd prefer to avoid block caving.

Q, you're assiduous in following what management tell us, but you appear to have a blind spot relating to this issue.

We are NOT de-risked, in fact we're a long way from it.

Everything the team is doing at the moment is about de-risking and turning the company into an entity which is attractive to others.

Q, ' we have been de-risked enough for years'. Sorry, but that simply isn't true. Perhaps you should ask DV for his opinion.

If we can get a reasonable price for our holding we should sell. There are plenty of other things where the money would be better spent.

Q, just out of interest, have you ever heard a CEO say he will overpay for assets? Corporate history is littered with companies who've claimed they haven't overpaid only for events to prove them wrong.

Having said that, I agree that BHP doesn't appear to be a real contender for Cascabel, but who knows? Circumstances and strategies change, so nothing can be ruled out.

There are plenty of buyers out there and they seem to take advantage of any dip. Maybe this being led by institutions?

Having said that, the volume has been pretty paltry recently.

Good to see RedKnight continuing to fight the good fight. I wonder how many shares him and his wife now own?

Fair enough. Personally I like the CEO to be on the hook in companies like this.

PS, it's all about the optics.( awful management speak, sorry)

I was referring to the remuneration/options question, not the broader picture.

The only criticism I have is that he hasn't bought any shares and Smith has only invested some loose change he found in his pocket.

Perhaps they are in your mind, but that's not the same thing as reality.

What utter tosh, IP.

Fort, apologies, I wasn't including the clear days bit. Mea culpa.

To be honest, I'm more interested in the motions rather than the date.

I've been trying to think if there's anything we are expecting by calendar y/e which would require an egm or Special Resolution. I'm not sure there is.