Member Info for addicknt

Q says they were scaled back. My money is on them either maintaining their percentage holding or, as a result of the dilution of NM et al, they will have increased it.
Could they both be at 15% now? Now that would be interesting because if at any stage they were deemed to be acting in concert they would be forced to make a bid for the company. My guess is they wouldn't want to be in that position...yet. So, 14.5% each?

FTJ, even if their purchases only maintain the status quo they are obliged to announce the number of shares they've bought.

Gorilla, yes, we should. The requirement is to do so within two trading days. The same will apply to BR and all those with current notifiable interests.

Re my last: NM will definitely have been diluted. He took 392k new shares out of a total of 206m. The whole picture rests on how many BHP/NCM took. If they stood their corner their position will have significantly increased in relation to Mather's interests.
Come on lads! Put us out of our misery!

Come to think of it, NM will also probably have been diluted, so I wonder there's no announcement with regard to his direct holding?

Ship, indeed. It's quite likely that none of the new investors have purchased a declarable stake, but BHP and NCM are obliged to inform us asap.

Both DGR and CGP have been diluted. I'm surprised at the former, but not in the least by the latter.

CD, possibly.

You are right about the 13.6% - in my opinion they were never going to let that slip significantly - at least not if they were interested in the long term. However, I think the pricing argument is a bit of a red herring. This is about dilution, not cost.

It seems to me that the participation of BHP/NCM in the placing gives us a far clearer picture of the timing of their next move.
Had they not got involved it would have suggested one of two things; 1) they were not interested in pursuing the project or 2) they were happy to be diluted until such time as they were prepared to make a major move i.e bid or jv (as Crux had suggested). Neither of these two possibilities seemed likely to me.
Their involvement would seem to indicate they're happy to let us continue to PFS and proving up our other resources - specifically Porvenir. Of course, if someone appears out of the woodwork in the meantime I've no doubt they will react accordingly. My conclusion is that we're looking at 2022 before their hand is fully revealed. Of course, things may change, but that's how I see it at the moment.
The one cast iron truth about it all is that anyone who still harbours a belief that either BHP or NCM are happy to sit back and remain minority partners should re-think their position. It isn't going to happen.

Having made such a fuss about being sidelined at the time of Franco, it would have been pretty surprising if they hadn't been involved in this placing.

Mind you, who said this this just after the AGM?: "...(the company) will issue new shares to make sure CGP,BHP and NCM don't get to subscribe" "I think BHP miscalculated yesterday" And "Let me help you schlem...NM will be in charge of the company"

p.s very good post earlier on,CD.

Egon, there's no difference.

rcgl, I wouldn't bother - it was incomprehensible.

sjn, the requirement is two trading days, although this is often exceeded. Theoretically the responsibility lies with the holder of the shares, but it's regularly done by the company.
I must admit in these days of instant information, I fail to understand why some companies take so long to do it.

DBW, yes, I'd agree with that, particularly as it relates to Porvenir.

Interesting article and thanks for posting, schlem.
Of particular note was the distinction they draw between buying individual assets and a full takeover of the parent company. We are in an interesting situation in as much as there's less risk of over-paying if the whole company is acquired. By that I mean the market cap currently attributes virtually zero value for our other assets apart from Cascabel. So, an acquirer could pay full value for Cascabel and get a free ride on the rest, thus making us highly attractive.

TBTT, I understand your position, but the fact is there are some good posters on here who provide valuable insight and interpretation. I actually also enjoy reading views which are different from mine - provided they are without the continuous insults from the likes of Quady.

I'll be honest, I'm getting seriously bored of Quady's ridiculous comments. I know some will say I should filter him, but I have never done that with anyone since I first joined a bb in 1999 and don't intend to now.
He is not telling the truth about the AGM resolution. There were a number of people on here who understood what it meant, me included. It was him who completely failed to understand anything about the outcome and that remains the case.
It took some reading but we got there in the end. Specifically, we were aware that an additional 5% could be raised if it were hypothecated. The one thing I will cheerfully admit to was not reckoning on the use of the mechanism employed in the placing - primarily because I've never been involved in one.

AngHol, no it wasn't. It was counterbalanced to a degree by a one million sale.

schlem, and someone coughed-up half a million last quid last evening. This is the biggest open market purchase we've seen for some while.

The people who will have been diluted here are us, the retail investor. And I don't mind one bit.