Member Info for addicknt

On a more serious note, that simple statement represents a complete sea change and one which is most welcome.
At last our CEO has woken up to reality.

DBW, it was a rhetorical question.

I wonder what happened to the tax issues?

"No evidence".

Q, to describe in it the simplest terms, it's because there isn't a sufficiently large block of shares to prevent BHP from gaining majority control - assuming they have NCM and CGP onside - which I am.
If the price is at a reasonable level, BR will jump, as will many private investors and those institutions who've taken a small holding as a punt.
For your theory to be right, NM would have to have control of over 50% of the equity and he doesn't.
He knows how vulnerable he is, hence the engagement of so many defence experts. But I've said all this a million times.

Q, I went to some lengths to do so a few weeks back. And as you commented on it, I guess you saw it.

ha, ha! I was hoping you'd do that!

There's a legal difference between 'confidential discussions' and becoming an Insider, with the latter carrying far greater sanctions if the conditions are breached, which explains why institutions will very rarely agree to it. I'm confident NCM would keep quiet, particularly as the key players will be well known to each other in the small world of mining. I also happen to think BHP and NCM's interests will be aligned and therefore it wouldn't serve their purpose to leak anything.
p.s I think you 'diverse book' tally is now up to three or four, so we have a way to go reach Miagi's target of fifty. Keep going, my son!

Q, just to point out a technicality. If BHP, or anyone else for that matter, wanted to launch a bid, they do not HAVE to communicate with other shareholders prior to going public - they can simply issue an RNS stating their intentions and then get on with the process of talking to shareholders.
However, if they wish to test the appetite of others they may approach them, during which process they will make it clear the third part will become an Insider, as per the Code. Sure, the risk of leaks are increased, but if you want to mitigate some of the risks of making an unsolicited bid, this is what you do. To my way of thinking, the much more likely scenario is that informal discussions will take place when BHP will ask a range of general questions about a shareholders intentions. We know CGP are more than willing sellers, so no conversation would be necessary, but the key party is NCM, and that's where the real interest lies. You can forget about our new shareholders, they're irrelevant at this stage.
BR would be most unlikely to signal their intent one way or another and would not, in most circumstances, ever be prepared to become Insiders.

Q, "they have no choice"...at that point your argument collapses; they have as many choices as they want. And how do you know they won't pay what NM 'wants'? You don't - admittedly, neither do I, but that's what negotiations are all about - finding the common ground. I'm afraid your premise is all wrong, BHP will not let £75m go up in smoke; they're not the worlds biggest miner for nothing.
This is all about timing and it's the one reason why attempting to trade this share is a fools game. It could happen at any moment.
I'm not going to address your "a deal would have been done by now" argument - it's been said too many times.

Q, you say people have never given you answers to various questions posed by yourself, but I believe I have, and you should note I don't recall ever saying finance couldn't be raised (stand to be corrected).
But dare I say it, you have never answered the absolutely fundamental question I've asked you on numerous occasions, which is; why do you think BHP will be happy to sit back and watch their £75m investment be diluted to irrelevance? And in the light of yesterdays announcement, why would they let the Chinese barge in on the party?
There is no logical answer to this other than they won't. No amount of wriggling can escape that inevitable conclusion. They didn't get involved with this company to sit back and watch someone else get full advantage of the considerable capital they placed at risk - it just won't happen.
Until you can satisfactorily answer this key issue, your argument is fatally impaired.

atg, let's assume there are considerable penalties involved - 1% of the total. All that would happen is that a bidder would take this into account when placing a value on the company and would reduce their offer accordingly. In other words, we get less. Mind you, in our context this is a drop in the ocean and is unlikely to play too much of a part. If someone wants us, they'll go for it regardless of a CFP.

It's not about fair play, it's about regulation.
The one element that is pertinent is that of fees, especially exit and penalty fees. I come back to my point, we've just completely altered the complexion of the board and if they don't do their job properly they should be sacked.

ATG, yes, I've raised the 'poison pill' issue before. Once upon a time this was common practice, not so nowadays and it's down to the corporate governance of independent NEDs to ensure no such arrangements are entered into. They are value destructive and must not be allowed.

Q, I do the same with some of yours.
The problem about your 'evidence' argument is that it ignores some of the fundamental elements of investing, which is all about trying to predict the future. In order to do that, you have to weigh-up probabilities and likely scenarios. It's always highly unpredictable, but that's the way markets work - which I don't need to tell you. If you simply rely upon historic events as your guiding principle, you are doomed to failure.

ATG, a conditional finance package will have no bearing at all upon whether someone will bid or not.

iceberg, that's a fair point and I was reluctant to employ it in my argument. However, judging by the comments, it is the case that more people appear to disagree than agree. Recommendations are a simple indicator, but are far from reliable.

Q, a PFS of $7bn would be wonderful and I sincerely hope we reach that point. However, I'm not sure it will and I'm assuming a figure of between $5 and $6BN - but obviously this is simply a guess - I'm trying to manage and temper my expectations.
As regards your 'diverse register' - you claim that we misunderstand your point, but it's interesting to note that virtually no one agrees with you (based upon the number of recommendations your posts on this topic receive). Why do you assume everyone else is wrong and you are right?

The reference he's just made doesn't count. The book opens at midnight.

going to open a book on the number of times Q says 'diverse book' in a single day.
The rules will allow you to provoke him into saying it.
Place your bets.