Member Info for addicknt

We've cracked 17p. Let's hope it lasts.

MF, I agree. Any such financing arrangement complicates an exit, and even if it has a get- out clause it will be costly and would be borne by shareholders.

As DV pointed out, we don't need the cash at the moment and although he is prudently having early stage discussions, he expressed no urgency. Hopefully, we won't need to go down this route.

I've just re-read my last post and realized it was very poorly expressed, but hopefully you understood.

MF, they're very conscious of not letting any one shareholder moving into a dominant position, whether through equity or a financing package. They are both corporate financiers and what to remain in a position whereby they can eventually create competitive tension in a bid situation.

NMM, to be honest I've never felt as positive after a ceo interview as I did after this one. Our previous leaders were dull, uninformative, never answered anything unequivocally and always left me non-plussed. What a refreshing change.

20p by the end of the week?

Damers, thanks for posting.

This is easily the best interview I've heard from any of our ceos and is a must watch for all shareholders. I feel even more confident we're on the right track and are in the hands of an excellent CEO. Great stuff!

Business section has a good article about the pressure on miners to consolidate and how many believe the Anglo/Teck deal will be the catalyst for a wave of m&a activity and that copper will be the focus.

I know we've heard it all before, but...

Q, if they 'wanted us cheap' they'd have made an offer already. The reality is they, and any other interested party, are far more concerned about reducing risk, both in terms of political and development risk.

I can't recall which one of our CEOs talked about an 'oven ready' project, but this is what DV is aiming to achieve. Many of us, including me, made the mistake of believing we could get a good deal without satisfying those two key risks. We were wrong. We mistakenly thought an MRE/PFS would be sufficient - they weren't. Our new guys understand this and are flat out addressing the issue. We're not there yet, but at long last we're on the right track.

Incidentally, I was encouraged by DV's presentation and it's clear there will a flow of good news in the coming weeks.

The reasons we haven't yet been sold are twofold: Perceived risk and value, which became apparent during the SR process.

The new team are addressing the first point (to be fair, so was SC, but he ballsed it up) and as sure as eggs are eggs, an offer at an acceptable level will follow. At this point we'll see just how interested our main shareholders are. From where I sit, BHP will not enter the fray and will be sellers, and from what I've heard Newmont aren't either, although they were mooted as becoming a cornerstone investor in ExCo/SouthCo, or whatever you want to call it.

Let's assume I'm right and Jiangxi are the bidders. In this situation and with Board support i.e Mather's acceptance, a deal will be struck and Jiangxi will achieve 51% in the bat of an eyelid. Game over.

Q, it's straightforward; an interested party tables an offer, which the Board may choose to support or not. It's then up to the shareholders to decide. It really isn't difficult; but you know this already.

RT, not as far as I'm aware. Mine was a simple reference to the fact he often accurately predicts a poor placing by an earlier release of spurious good news.

Fort, as has been pointed out many times, the Chinese issue was not a problem for us.

Q, in theory you're right, but in practise it doesn't always play out like that, and I gave you a good example with regard to placings.

Although insider trading undoubtedly still occurs, I don't believe it's anywhere near as prevalent as it was in the '80s and '90s, when it was regarded as an open secret that many corporate finance practitioners were happy to supplement their incomes by a bit of dodgy dealing - in fact, it'd been going on for decades. The more senior you were, the less likely you were to get collared. The most guilty were the corporate PR men, who lined their pockets at every available opportunity.

Q, I forgot probably the most pertinent example of strategic news releases i.e good news before a bad placing.

Whatever one thinks of Mr Winnifrith, he often calls it right when he draws attention to weak companies who dredge up spurious positive news in a futile attempt to ameliorate the effect of a placing.

Due to poor volume I see they've followed our lead and are to quit TSX.

Q, that's not correct. Companies do sometimes release news at what they regard to be optimal impact moments.(personally, I think it's largely irrelevant) For example, it used to be the case that Tuesdays and Thursdays were the best time to release good news and cob Friday was often used for bad news - some companies still try that ploy, which frankly, makes them look even worse and is a reliable guide to a useless management team.

As far as today is concerned, I'm fairly certain if they had any good news to release they would have done so. DV's presentation would be more powerful if he was able to include further good results at Tandy and progress on the corporate reorganization. This is not to say there isn't good news coming, just that it isn't ready yet.

A typically ignorant response from our resident fantasist.

'I'm expecting the imminent monetization of SouthCo'. What form of monetization are you expecting? At this stage it won't involve any return to shareholders, and unless there's an outbreak of common sense at the Mining Ministry with regard to the levy, I fear we may be in for a long wait.

'A timely reminder of copper as a factor driving consolidation in the mining sector and the paucity of growth options...'

Seems to be dropping a fairly big hint.