Member Info for addicknt

Pinot, I can't see any reason why it should. It doesn't fundamentally change anything.

In my opinion, the reason it hasn't emerged is that there are many different strands of conversations going on.
You don't make an announcement such as we did, detailing an offer and then sit back and do nothing. The world simply doesn't work like that. It would have opened-up many parties thought processes and I believe the past few months have been spent discussing them.

Look at the Stock Exchange web site...it's the most effective way to see announcements.

Interesting RNS this morning. Solid progress being made across Cascabel.

Jerry, I agree. However, I think any bidder will want the rest as well; the reason being that they'll be able to pick-up the rest for relatively little outlay. NM will want to achieve as high a value as possible for Cascabel, but the quid pro quo will be throwing in the rest for not much.
I'd prefer the "prove it and flog it it" model and hope we can achieve it, but I'm doubtful that we will.

I can't see why it should make any difference.
Mind you, if the track record of UK listed companies is anything to go by, every consolidation is nearly always followed by a price fall.

Well said, vindaloo.

It seems that a number of you still expect AE to opine upon Whet.
He is not a director of the company; was apparently responsible for the failure to be granted a listing on whatever the original exchange was, and has been subjected to a message from the company making it crystal clear that only directors can make public announcements about the affairs of the company. (as if he, or anyone else, should need reminding) I suspect that this is the reason for his last offering stating that he would limit his future posts to legal matters.
His role in Whet has always been opaque, but the company appears to have clarified matters...he has none.

Fair point, Perry. Perhaps he should say so in a clear and unambiguous way.

Very good presentation...for some reason I always trust a CFO more than I do a CEO. (This applies to virtually all companies, not just BCN)
Production 2023. When I first invested in 2014 the date was 2019. Still, slippage in major projects is always to be expected and the team have done a good job in proving-up what is an incredible resource (remember when that bloke Lowry was shouting from the rooftops saying that the company wouldn't be able to produce lithium?)
I'm absolutely sure GF will get their approval; after all, this is just part of China's global economic imperialism. That leaves just one major hurdle; the balance of the funding and begs the questions, "when and how?". I just wish PS had been able to produce a single announcement, including details of an entire financing package, rather than this drip, drip of an incomplete picture.

?

Not yet, bluegrass.

Quady, I absolutely understand your view, but I think it has a major flaw.
Any of the majors taking a stake will be the most obvious candidates to provide some of the financing required to take it into production. The amount of equity they can provide will be limited to levels which see them remain under 30%...the rest will have to be loan notes etc. The problem with this is that they will ask themselves; "why are we taking this level of risk in order to make money for existing SOLG shareholders? Particularly when we know we can have the lot" Again, for this level of financial outlay, they will want full management control.
This is why I don't see us going into production as an independent.

FR1, what your position assumes is that nothing has changed in the past two years; whereas, self-evidently, it has. In fact, the story bears no resemblance whatsoever to the situation of two years ago. And for this reason, a takeover looks very likely.
Separately, thinking about the recent shenanigans, it may well be that the court case has done us a huge favour. It has clarified the constitutional situation, as well as forcing the government to declare very publicly its support of mining. In other words, it has removed the greatest impediment to the future prospects of our company. So, one behalf of us all, I'd like to thank that chap for his invaluable service.

What we can absolutely guarantee is that he isn't sitting on his arse doing nothing.

nomadic, absolutely spot-on. His lack of clarity is what is preventing me from going long again. But, as those of us who've been around this a long time know, Secker and clarity are not two words often found in the same sentence.

Spikey, as someone who has more than a passing interest in pro cycling, I'm very familiar with the name Bruyneel. Why,or how, he became involved with WRN is a complete mystery.

I was mystified by the constant use of the word "we". To whom does he refer? Wrn doesn't exist as a trading entity and the directors of Whet have made it perfectly clear that only they can speak for the company. So, who are the "we"?
By the way, the last time I looked at the Whet web site I noticed that several directors had disappeared and yet, I didn't see the appropriate filings at Companies House...although it's perfectly possible I've got it wrong.

Did I mis-read this? When did Hawa pull out of the offtake deal? They've got this wrong, haven't they?

I have no intention of trying to 'sway' people's opinions. Are they that feeble-minded that they're susceptible to an opinion expressed on here?
Over the past few weeks I've seen so much utter nonsense posted on here that a bit of balance was required.
By the way, I agee with your comment about the choice of partner and said so when the deal was announced.