Member Info for addicknt

IP, sadly, Pbow has removed himself from this site. He got fed up with the utter nonsense.

Yesterday Kore Potash announced a $2.2bn funding package for their mine development in the Republic of Congo and it's worth having a look at the structure, particularly the split between the project finance and royalty elements. They also provide a handy guide to the benefits of royalty versus equity funding (personally, I'm not so convinced of this unless there's a clear exit route from the deal) It's also interesting to note the package is subject to Shariah law.

It goes to show funding is available for new mining projects, even in dodgy places like the Congo, which makes Ecuador look like a paragon of stability and probity.

Stas, good to see a new shareholder posting here.

I'm not sure I'd describe the situation as being set up for a takeover, but Jiangxi are clearly in pole position and will be working closely with the company. The task for management is ensuring it doesn't become a one horse race.

If it means we give up a whole raft of our concessions, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. We've never done anything with them and it's unlikely we ever will.

Mining Supervision and Control tax. Forgot the 'supervision' bit.

I fear the proposed new Mining and Control tax may put a spanner in the works for ExCo.

RK, I haven't been following the story that closely, but didn't the GGP directors give up a load of their options recently? This included the 100m the chairman had.

RT, as you know, by the company's own estimates 45% of the shares are held by retail and institutions with non-declarable holdings. Of the 55% held by large shareholders, it's my belief 45% are likely to vote with the Board. BHP are the outlier and their recent voting pattern tends to suggest they either abstain or vote against the Board. However, PS suggested he has well-established contacts within BHP and perhaps he's been working on repairing the relationship, although historically their interests have not been aligned with those of our Board and recent developments with Jiangxi may make it more difficult to find common ground.

It would be ironic if a takeover was announced at the low price you fear and BHP were the ones to stand up against it, thereby acting in support of the small shareholders. They would go from being the evil villain of the piece to retail shareholder heroes in a flash.

About 15 or so years ago I took a punt in the original company which, from memory, turned out to be a disaster. I sold most of them but kept a small rump of shares and sat back and watched them get diluted out of sight. Mather resigned in about 2010/11 and it looked like he'd be gone for good, but as we all know, he rose from the grave some time later.

As far as the current status of its assets is concerned, they were written off ages ago, but I seem to recall a fairly recent reference to the fact the concessions had been given up...or something like that. It's a pity they didn't buy the Havieron prospect instead.

Formerly, don't you think it's a bit early to pass judgement on the new boys? Surely, we need to see what their plans are and whether they can deliver them before we can pass judgement?

Adieuk, thanks for posting. Well worth a listen.

As he covers the ground with regard to both investment in juniors and M&A, it's interesting to tick-off the criteria we conform to, as well as those we don't. The fact we have three majors onboard as well as backing from Franco/Osisko distinguishes us from many other juniors. However, management is one area where in the past we've failed. We have a great deal riding on our new dynamic duo.

Eloro, thanks.

Great rant, SH, but I wouldn't get too smug if I were you. I still recall the utter bs you posted under your two previous identities.

Bozi,

1. True.

2. Well, yes and no.

3. If they are, I'm quite happy with that. However, the conversation with PS revealed some quite interesting thinking about this issue and I don't believe we are in a stand-off with them.

Your final para: absolutely right.

Eloro, I couldn't see his answer.

The other day someone said Irwin has gone quiet recently. Apparently he's been saying Jiangxi will be the buyers of Cascabel.

He doesn't have any more insight than we do, but he's reaching the same conclusion. For me, the only question is how far down the line we have to go before they make the move.

The obvious issue is why they aren't going for it now? I can only assume they don't wish to go hostile and are waiting until they receive a board recommendation from us.

SH, I'm not quite sure why you have this infatuation with the time and date of the calls (there were two), but out of courtesy I'll answer. They were on Thursday 15th May between three and four o'clock. I could give you more detail, but I'm not going to bother.

Of course, this doesn't take you any further forward as not doubt you'll simply accuse me of inventing it, but as far as I'm concerned you can take it or leave it - I really couldn't give a toss. By the way, you said you were going to contact 'the front desk'...which one? Quito? For guidance, PS lives in Switzerland and there is no 'front desk'.

SH, have you read Jerry's post yet? Perhaps you should, unless of course, you think I am Jerry.

Orthern, in the last week DV has told a couple of shareholders that a corporate update is 'imminent', although whether this is a solgold 'imminent' remains to be seen.

With regard to content, if they follow the route pursued by most new management teams in a turnaround situation, they will kitchen- sink the process, but they will also need to provide very clear guidance as to how the strategy 're-set' is going to work. Hopefully, they'll be able to tell us we have achieved the Franco milestones and will give us details of ExCo, including its cornerstone investors.

Let's just hope they serve up something which contains none of the usual ambiguity and which leaves us in no doubt as to our future direction.

So no evidence, then. Merely supposition.