Member Info for addicknt

Perhaps due to the fact you had me on filter you missed my more recent posts?
Following the seismic change which took place after the humiliation of the last agm and the subsequent RNS announcing a truce, I stated that this had opened the way for an agreed bid. I have also said that were the company to irk BHP again and, should they want the asset, (why wouldn't they?), they'd simply bid for it either by making an offer which couldn't be refused, or by going to hostile. My position hasn't changed fundamentally, it's merely been tweaked in light of more recent events, which is what any sensible investor should always be ready to do.

I fear you have massively misunderstood the way the relationship between the two parties has changed and indeed the way these things work. There will not be a hostile bid; it will be an agreed deal and I'm afraid your 'diverse book' argument remains the red herring it's always been.

This is a question I've asked you before but have never received a response, but following your various observations of this morning I thought I'd try again:
Assuming, as we all do, that we own some truly astonishing assets, why do you think BHP will be content to merely own 14% of the company? Of what use is a minority shareholding to the worlds largest miner?

Great stuff, RK.

The only two questions in my mind are 1) how much more value can this management team add before BHP make their move and 2) how much time will BHP allow them? The track record over the past two years has been anything but impressive, however this is not the same outfit it once was.

RK, I most certainly agree with you, and were he capable of expressing his views without the constant insults and arrogance, no one would have any problem whatsoever. But he has consistently proved he can't.

Q, your argument always seems to be that other people are "twisting" things - you never address the substance. And just for guidance, it's impossible to 'twist' a statement that says categorically the company is now willing to explore all options.

MF, exactly the response I expected from you. Congratulations.

MF, far from it, I simply find it amusing. Btw, what's your answer to my question?
As for black and white statements, I noticed neither you nor Quady attempted to answer the observation about the CGP RNS.

MF, what else do you expect them to say?

DBW, thanks for this. Thus far I've resisted the temptation to get involved too much in the production date argument (mainly because it' isn't going to happen), but the one thing I will say is that if KM meant block caving he should have said so, and he did not. He sowed unnecessary confusion, and it's not the first time.

Quady, no one is "twisting" anything; it's right in front of your eyes in black and white. The RNS couldn't have been any clearer, at least to those of us who are not quite as mono-focussed. The company committed to explore "all options", and 99.999% of us understand full well what that means.

Just to put some flesh on the bones of my last comment, I wonder if by virtue of the statement which was also made relating to our peace treaty with BHP/NCM, CGP are now a bit more isolated?
Prior to NMs removal all parties were united in a common cause i.e to get rid of him; once they'd achieved that ambition and the majors sat down with our boys, perhaps they bought into a story which said "give us the backing to get on with producing the PFS and once it's done, we'll talk turkey". Perhaps this may not be the outcome CGP want? Perhaps initially it may not produce the dramatic return they want? My suspicion is that a jv , for example, would not be what they want...unless it gets them off the capex hook.
CGP need a clean exit, but to my way of thinking it's possible that a closer working relationship between us and BHP may have made life a little bit more uncomfortable for CGP.

Bozi, I tend to agree (as I said in my post which crossed over with yours), and the interesting point of that is how CGP/others will react to an inability to deliver on the public statement. Will the discontent rear its head again? What will CGP do next time around? What can they do?
As for your question about holdings, no I didn't buy any more, although I have done in the past few days. My view is that by virtue of making the statement the company has made a rod for its own back and some form of action has become inevitable.

Jerry, that's my suspicion. It was certainly the case over the last two years of NM's reign and I guess they are waiting to see if the new regime can actually begin to deliver.

Great post CD, but thank heavens the US exists - we wouldn't be here without them. p.s they didn't invent porn...it's been around ever since mankind realised what's what.

that one thing which has surprised me about this share has been the lack of market reaction to the RNS relating to our new entente cordiale with CGP.
For the first time the company admitted it was prepared to consider "all options" with regard to enhancing shareholder value and yet the market barely batted an eyelid. In virtually any other circumstance I can recall, when a company has made a similar statement the share price has rocketed, and yet we witnessed no reaction at all. The implications of this strategy are potentially very significant so why hasn't the market picked up on this fundamental shift? Is it because they don't believe it?

"No, it would be closer to 2028". Kinda puts the argument to rest, doesn't it.
And no, DBW he wasn't just referring to block cave - he specifically said "first gold/copper", so by definition that means gold/copper mined by any system.

Quady consistently proves the old adage that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Quite right, Bozi, particularly with regard to your observation about NM.