Member Info for addicknt

confirming the outcome of the CC decision.

This is very good news for us. Hopefully this issue can now be put to bed.

That's a fair point Jerry and is the approach I've taken with BCN. However, that situation relates to the completion of a finance package, not a takeover. If the latter occurs here the opportunity will be lost. But I absolutely get your point.

It's not a "better" prospect, Greenmile, it's a different prospect.
If you're into investing in junior explorers you should have both companies in your portfolio...as many of us do.

To be honest, Scrat, the thing that did it for me was not the BHP rumour, but rather the report from Equador of the establishment of a mining code of conduct and specific mining cabinet. It's one of the most tangible signs we've seen of the government putting it's weight behind the industry.
Warm words are fine and dandy, but action is better.

Apologies, Scrat, it's not normally my style, but I got a bit carried away.
Let's hope our faith is rewarded.

certainly on a nice run at the moment. Added another 100k, so 200k for the day, and have now reached my target holding.
Over to you Mr BHP.

A bit of price action has released some stock and I've added another 100k.

Btw, the market is seemingly short of stock. It's not able to give a price on the ask, for any reasonable quantity, at anywhere near the quoted price. 10k is the most I can get quote for at the ask price. It was like this for large parts of yesterday afternoon and has continued this morning. Which is rather annoying.

He makes a number of references to the fact this is the only Tier 1 outside of major ownership and he concludes by saying that if BHP (or New) don't buy, someone else will. It couldn't be clearer. He knows full well we haven't got the wherewithal to take this to production and clearly believes the way to maximise shareholder value is to sell.
He was also laying out their stall as being a cheap way into the project and anticipates early returns.
I remain convinced New aren't in a position to take us out, so it's BHP + others as yet unknown.

Morning Optimus.
Reading between the lines, he's very obviously of the opinion it will be taken out by BHP. And I have no doubt whatsoever he isn't going to allow us to buy their stake. Which, surprise, surprise, is exactly my opinion.

Well, it's abundantly clear which way he thinks this will be going.

Ah! I get it now. I was trying to work out what an anno cement Tom was.
Let's hope you mate is right.

Is that some kind of secret code, fruitbat?

everyone else has already seen this, but I've just read an article dated 11th Feb giving details of a speech by the vice-president of mining in the government, in which he states that they will be setting out "clear rules" for mining in the country. They will "optimize the process of consultation" and will establish a "mining cabinet", which will be chaired by the country's Vice-President.
The intention is to "lower pressure" on mining companies and boost the sector.
This is good news and is a demonstration that they understand the uncertainty caused by the referendum issue.

iceberg, thanks.

Jerry, thanks for saving me the bother of writing.

You may have a point, iceberg, but the figures I'm referring to are as follows:
In the three months to 31 Sept '19, listed under "Investing Activities", is $21.2m described as "Acquisition of exploration and evaluation assets".
The figure for the same caption for three months to 31 Dec is $9.7m.
There was also an increase of $72m of Intangible Assets for the six month period ended 31 Dec.
What are those Intangibles? What is the definition of something listed as being an exploration and evaluation asset, particularly when it comes under the heading of "Investing Activities"? Surely, the drilling campaign is not described as an "Investment Activity", is it? To my way of thinking it should be fully expensed and written-off as an operating cost. If it leads to an increase in the asset base, this is where it would be classified as an increase. In other words, you spend the cash on exploration and expense the cost in the p&l and then increase the value of the tangible assets.
I'm certainly no expert in mining company accounts, but I'm not too useless at getting to grips with a "normal" set.
I suspect if I delved deeper, I may find the answer.

Last year the company spent a significant amount of money acquiring new assets (not too many announcements were made about this). There was a hike in the last six months of the calendar year and it was these acquisitions that led to the necessity to raise money from BHP.
It seems unlikely NM has simply gone mad and is rushing around buying everything in sight on a whim and I think we can assume the board regards these purchases as value enhancing. If not, why take the company to the brink in terms of available cash? But why have we not received any real explanation/ singing from the rooftops? They've very much slipped in under the radar, but are obviously of great interest.
I'm afraid I simply don't get it.

Agreed, Cookie. There is no alternative, the cash is leeching out of the door every day.
I admit to not understanding NM's motivation in all of this. I can only assume he's developed some sort of dynastic vision of his legacy and, quite frankly, has lost sight of things. He appears to have made the all too familiar and fatal mistake, of falling in love with the company. This rarely ends well.
I can only hope our main shareholders are able to thwart his hubris and deliver value to the shareholders.