Member Info for addicknt

rcgl, everything you say in your second paragraph is correct.

iceberg, who complained lack of news? Not me - although some would be very welcome. In any event, no news will emerge from these presentations - it's not permitted.

Gosh! Up 0.78% - it must be the fevered excitement building up at the prospect of listening to the worlds most boring speaker (I accept Peter Secker at BCN is probably worse) tell us the same thing as he told last time...and the time before...and the time before that.

Morning, Quady.
As I've said previously, I completely understand your point of view but consider the chances of the outcome you desire to be vanishingly remote.
You say there is no evidence of a bid and of course you are right - we haven't received one, ergo, no evidence. But that is irrelevant, because this isn't about what has happened thus far, it's about what's likely to happen in the future and it's in this respect your argument becomes difficult to sustain. You have to look at the balance of probabilities and, given the many we've discussed ad nauseam, they weigh heavily in favour of there being a bid.
You consistently refer to the words of NM, but let's look at his actions: he has appointed a veritable army of advisors, at great cost to the company, to defend against a bid. Why do you think he's done that? The answer is blindingly obvious and it directly contradicts your view. He fully expects to receive a bid and is preparing accordingly - Companies simply don't do this if they are confident their position is secure. What further evidence do you require? You place huge store in what NM says but appear perfectly willing to ignore his actions.
As for your view that a bid would be very difficult due to the current shareholding structure, you are simply wrong - we are uniquely vulnerable in this respect.
I'm sure there are many people on here, me included, who agree with you that far greater value could be achieved over time, 10 years perhaps. At that stage, you will be 68, NM will be nearly 80, assuming he isn't pushing up daisies and personally, I wouldn't want to be an investor in any company with a CEO over the age of 70, and even that is a push.

Quady, you really don't get it, do you?
The outcome here does not depend upon what NM wants or says. End of.

Quady, it is not difficult...it's dead easy.
It's the implication of your statement that makes no sense. And as for your comment that it makes no sense to wait for what BHP do, I'm afraid I profoundly disagree, and if you thought about it carefully, so would you.

Quady, so we return to your maxim that if something hasn't happened in the past, it won't happen in the future. It's your argument that makes no sense.

Of course we want Barrick to bid! We want every Tom, Dick and Harry to have a pop.

What happens on the TSX is irrelevant.

Things we know as facts:
1) BHP want, in one form or another, to be part of this story.
2) Newcrest do not intend to sell, but we do not know whether they are content to sit on the sidelines as a minority shareholder.
3) NM will not recommend an offer which he regards as undervaluing our assets.
4) We are highly vulnerable to a hostile bid due to the strength of BHP and Newcrest's existing holdings.
5) BHP do not need to wait for a DFS.
Speculation:
1) BHP will not wish to pay NM's price.
2) They will not be content to be minority holders.
3) Discussions with NM have either already taken place or will do so soon.
4) They will not reach agreement on price.
5) BHP will then be faced with a choice, sit back and watch, or go hostile.
6) Speculation about Barrick/others continues. Personally, I don't see it, - as a consequence of BHP's strong position - they will not sell.
Ultimately, this is ALL about what BHP want to do. If NM maintains his stance, I simply do not see both parties reaching agreement on price. So, if BHP really want it, which I believe they do, they will bid. As to timing, who knows?

Agreed, Colonel. Which rather begs the question; why on earth are we wasting time and a great deal of money trying to take them over?
Since day 1 I've maintained the view that the CGP bid is ridiculous - and nothing that has emerged subsequently makes me want to change my mind. This is corporate stupidity on a grand scale and it's my belief the market feels the same way.

rcgl2, if they follow normal procedures the decision will be made by the fund manager. However, given their much more important relationship with BHP, I guess we can assume some arm twisting at a higher level.

Quady, I'm not sure I understand. You've been arguing for ages that it's the diverse nature of the share register that makes a hostile bid unlikely, and now you say 'with a more consolidated share register'. What do you mean? Are you implying that NM and CGP will suddenly become best mates?
The point I was making is that CGP will have discussions with BHP and New separately, as will BR - I can't see them even picking up the phone to Mather.

You do realise that if BHP and Newcrest team up to table a low ball offer, our fate may be determined by CGP and Black Rock? If they stand firm, we may have a chance of avoiding being screwed by our main shareholders. Given all the opprobrium directed at CGP, this would be ironic, wouldn't it?

The reason for no announcements is obvious; Mather is sat round a table with BHP hammering out a deal which will deliver £2 per share.

rcgl2, theoretically you are right - if say 20% of shareholders didn't want to sell and the "mop-up" provisions were not triggered, those non-sellers could hang on to their shares. The question is; why would they?
If BHP bought the 80% they would have total control. The company would be de-listed and moved into their corporate structure as yet another subsidiary holding. All current board members would be removed from their positions and the holders of the 20% would have absolutely no say in the direction of the company. There would be no dividends distributed for years and they would be wholly reliant upon BHP for any future valuation of the business. They would have no pre-emption rights, or indeed, any other significant rights.
Can you see anyone wanting to be in that position when the alternative would have been to walk away with many millions of pounds in profit?
You are correct about the requirement to communicate with shareholders had a firm intention to bid been received.

Quady, I have answered this question directly on several occasions- as have others. The fact you don't listen until someone comes up with an answer which approximates to your view of life, is merely an example of you seeking confirmation bias.
As an ex-corporate financier, let me assure you a bid for this company will be easy to put together and almost impossible to defend. Btw, I have no intention of repeating my previous explanations.

Quady, who wrote at 19.20 yesterday, "seeing no hostile bid has emerged since the PEA, I don't think one will"

I have already explained why a competitor may wait to see what BHP do first. And I should add, BHP are in a very strong starting position, and this reinforces my opinion.

And when have I EVER said anything about "selling cheap"? The answer is never.

I think your key problem is, as far as corporate activity is concerned, you don't understand the strength of companies such as BHP, and the weakness of SOLG. We are incredibly vulnerable to either a negotiated deal, or an unsolicited offer. NM has very little in the locker by way of a defence. The best hope for a decent return is for him to build competitive tension - which is what I think he's doing.

Morning Quady.
So, in your view because something hasn't happened already, it won't happen in the future? Interesting thought process. How about mining hasn't happened, so it won't in the future? It makes about as much sense.
The closer we get to October, the more likely a hostile bid looks. Why? Because it implies NM and BHP have not been able to work out an acceptable way forward. And I also suspect that if there are other interested parties, as some seem to believe, they are waiting to see what BHP do. The thinking behind this is obvious: see what sort of valuation BHP place on the entity and how they structure a deal, before spending a huge amount of money on a bid process. In other words, they're keeping their powder dry.
Quady, I know I've said it before, but no company employs the army of advisors we have - at vast cost, without anticipating needing them. NM ain't that daft.

Quady, no disrespect but I fear it's you who doesn't understand how a bid would happen and succeed. And to be honest, it would not be difficult.