Member Info for addicknt

a couple of technical appointments.

Hydrogen, your arithmetic is a bit wonky.

theiceberg, your analogy isn't appropriate.
Most of us who've been here a while are not disappointed with what we're holding, we are simply examining what we see as a likely outcome. You have a different opinion and that's obviously fine. From our standpoint we could turn your analogy on it's head and say to you that if you want a miner that's going to production, then buy something else.

have been asking about the AIM100 listing.
According to the Stock Exchange web site, it did not happen today. At least, not so far as I could see.

Optimus, I agree - he's playing a very clever and sophisticated game. One of the key elements of this was the appointment of Citi. I see this as all part and parcel of delivering a great deal. Many CEOs get caught with their pants down when a potential bidder knocks on the door and they are ill-prepared for a proper negotiation. NM has made sure he's not in that position. This is very good forward thinking and is recognition that it's likely to happen.

Quady, I think you underestimate two things: first, the likelihood of an agreed deal. You'd be surprised the number of times I've heard CEOs state they'll never sell and yet, when hard cash is put on the table, hey presto!, they change their minds.
Second, large companies will not shy away from a hostile bid if forced to. And again, although people may say they won't sell, the moment a decent profit appears, they'll happily take it. The 'messiness' is a red herring, particularly for a major global business.
But the key question remains; why would they sit back and watch? The minority shareholding thing is not a compelling argument - far from it. For me, the answer is every bit as crystal clear as your argument is to you. Commercial imperative will trump everything here and it's merely a matter of timing.

I fully understand the pro-production argument and why some of you feel so strongly about it, but I've yet to see a compelling reason explaining why the company's two largest and most important shareholders will want it to happen.
It's as if you believe they will simply disappear and 'forget' about their substantial investment and will be perfectly happy to sit back and watch as a new competitor emerges. It simply makes no commercial sense.

Jerry, nope.

Jerry, at least your price prediction was spot on.

Scoutt, absolutely. We as much as possible on the table before the inevitable bid arrives.

One word: Excellent.

cookie, that isn't the case and it looks as if Hav will be mined long before we get going.
And in any event, why would New be hiring a mining engineer for a company they don't own and are unlikely to?

Quite right, Scoutt. People are clutching at straws.

Jerry, I seem to recall her saying something about SOLG some while back. Does that ring a bell?
From memory, she effectively said Cascabel was rubbish and no one would be interested. Not long after the world and his wife agreed it was Tier 1.
When she released this "bombshell", I had a look at some of her other stuff. Sure, her knowledge of geology all looks impressive, but it seemed to me that time after time, she drew the wrong conclusions. I imagine this explains why she hasn't got a proper job in the industry and explains her anger.

The price IS confirmed at 110p.

I suggest you look at the Stock Exchange web site. It is the ONLY reliable and timely source of announcements.

Investor, you say the timing is 'shocking' and refer to 7:01.
Are you aware the Stock Exchange RNS service opens at 7:00 and this is the time most companies post their announcements? There's nothing 'shocking' about it.

Personally, I'd been expecting them to do this. They are a very small company and would have wanted/needed to achieve a wider spread of risk in their portfolio.

No one has picked up the speculation in the press today.

If you were BHP and wanted to bid, what would your timing be?
You could imagine that they'd like to a PFS and possibly a DFS, the argument being they'd want a clearer picture of what they're buying.
The counter argument to this is twofold: they wouldn't want Solg to be encumbered by the Franco monies and second, they have their own in-house resources who could do it cheaper. I think it would be fair to assume they already have a fair idea of the economics of the project.
My view on this is that they find themselves in a tricky situation.
In an ideal world ( from their point of view), they'd prefer to wait, but the Franco deal has confused the situation - hence the wish not to introduce third part funding.
This was clever stuff from NM, but I'm not sure it's going to be sufficient to deter BHP and I still think we could see a bid before the full funding package is arranged.