Member Info for addicknt

Good to see our old friend Quady continuing to confuse the tactical and the strategic. He'll get it one day.

ATG, I'd respectfully disagree. To my mind it shows far greater clarity of thinking and focus. It looks as if KM is bringing a degree of practicality to the party which was hitherto missing.

The size of royalty deals has increased exponentially over recent years and some pretty chunky numbers have been committed - albeit with larger, established and profitable companies.
The question for us is; how much could we realistically raise against the backdrop of us needing between two and three billion dollars? $500m? Or more? Or less?
The next question is, can BHP/NCM prevent the company from raising cash via this mechanism? Do the articles allow for it? (I don't know the answer)
Where this leads me is that however much we could raise via a royalty deal, it will fall far short of what we need. People have talked about a bond/debt deal. The bond would have to have zero yield for at least seven years and a debt package would have to be similarly structured. How many lenders out there who would find this attractive?
What we do know is that our main shareholders can prevent any significant equity being raised. Surely, given that we will need equity, the situation will demand the involvement of our major shareholders?

rcgl, quite right. I'm not sure why some people continue to raise this issue on a fairly regular basis. If there's any change in major shareholdings it will be announced via an RNS. End of story.

zoros, you opening sentence is completely at odds with the rest of your post. They are NOT the biggest shareholders - as the rest of your post makes clear. So why did you suggest they were?

DBW, interesting article and obviously bodes well for us. However, I do have one question; has the country really lost one sixth of its rain forest to oil extraction? I don't know the answer, but it seems an awful lot for what is a relatively small sector.

Kohaku, they are nominee shareholders, much as HL et al are. The same is true of Bank of Singapore, which was shown to hold a similar percentage (assuming the numbers shown were accurate)

Bozi, not for one moment was I suggesting his rights should be removed. I was simply pointing out that the way some people portrayed the result was misleading, to put it mildly.
There's a broader corporate governance issue about whether CEO/director shareholders should be able to vote for themselves when it comes to re-elections and it has led to much debate amongst those people interested in such matters. It's not a straightforward discussion.

Bozi, subtract his votes and the result looks quite different from the way in which some people portrayed it. Of course I wouldn't expect that particular turkey to have voted for Christmas.

Bozi, your agm voting analysis overlooks the fact that 20% or so of the votes were accounted for by NM voting for himself.

Interesting. If these are direct holdings why haven't they been declared? They must be holding on behalf of numerous clients.

The level of his involvement will determine which type of CEO we get.
I can't think of many who'd be prepared to have a back seat driver barking instructions. A decent CEO will want to set his own agenda and will approach matters with a fresh mind. He will be collaborative, but also of an independent disposition. The very last thing we need is someone's glove puppet.
Mather is now a non-exec, but one with expert knowledge and experience. The new guy must use this expertise, but never be in thrall to the man.
In my opinion, the chairman's role is going to be very important in terms of making sure the board functions properly and this will require the CEO to be given as much latitude as he needs. Mather may struggle with this and unless he accepts the new status quo, trouble may lie ahead.

The Telegraph ran a full page article today on the minerals needed for the green revolution and detailed the degree to which cooper is absolutely fundamental.
From a global perspective it's terrifying to see the extent to which China has so much control. To put it bluntly, if things ever get serious with them we are all totally fecked.

Scrat, agreed - it was something of a milestone.

Eish, I think that depends upon which side of the fence you sit. If you believe the independent production argument, it doesn't seem likely much will happen before the PFS is released. If however, you believe the jv/takeover scenario, it could come at any time ( Liberum suggested this will come post-election).
Personally, I don't see the election as being a catalyst of itself - it's already clear both candidates appear committed to mining. Similarly, the market appears blissfully uninterested in drilling results. It seems as if the view is ; "yes, we know you've got a fantastic resource, but until you can prove you can monetize it, we're not interested".

So, there you have it ladies and gentlemen; the reason why no bid is likely is the "resource". Damn, and there's me thinking we had the seventh largest copper resource, not to mention the gold and silver. If only I'd known!

zoros, thanks for posting - a very interesting podcast. The first couple of minutes reveal a great deal about our situation.

Bozi, what criticism? I'm afraid you're guilty of conformation bias...again. Let's look at what I actually said as opposed to what you imagined I said.
1. It's taken a while. Fact. We've been waiting a long time, as anyone on this board will attest. Crikey, it's been said enough times.
2. The RNS contains some excellent (news). Fact. Unless you think otherwise.
3. I particularly like the news that dd has started... Perhaps you don't?

I said nothing else. I'm afraid you've been brainwashed by your chum and appear incapable of understanding what people really say.

DBW, they downgraded their price expectations just after the announcement of the PFS delay. They've been consistent in their opinion that we'll be taken over, although I think their "third party" comment is a non-starter.

Bozi, are you referring to me? If so, please point out the "sly digs".