Member Info for addicknt

I see they mention a public listing for ExCo. The previous RNS talked about it remaining as a subsidiary company under the solg banner.

I sincerely hope they give us shares in the company as it'll provide us with some liquidity.

He makes the same mistake with regard to G Mining.

Pbow, exactly. Mine was a rhetorical question.

Fort, when you say Osisko=Chinese, what do you mean?

Vujcic and Smith are travelling to China tomorrow for meetings with Jiangxi.

Additionally, news on a range of topics will be announced soon.

This came from a poster on there who spoke to Smith this pm.

Darren, I should have also said that eventually you'll receive a message from your SIPP provider asking if you accept the offer or not. This will only involve you in a box ticking process.

There are plenty of articles on google about the whole process and Stockopedia offers a pretty clear explanation, as do various lawyers. It's worth having a quick read.

Darren, Nobby's victory was great news for us and hopefully we now have a stable platform to move forward.

I haven't looked at the detail of the Lumina offer, but it's been recommended by the Board and 52.% of shareholders have already pledged to support the transaction, so it should go through.

In these circumstances the normal advice provided by the company is not todo anything at the moment i.e don't sell. The reason for this is to protect yourself in case a competing bid emerges at a higher price. I have no idea how likely that possibility is. The downside of this is that you're exposed to the risk of the deal not happening. If the current sp is at or above the offer price you may wish to reduce your risk and sell now. This means you may miss out on a few more bob, but at least you'll have banked a good profit.

If you're happy with the risk, sit tight because at this stage there's nothing for you to do. If it proceeds the money will eventually make its way into your SIPP.

Good luck.

RK, yes it can be renewed.

Over the years I've been involved in numerous data rooms as a buyer, seller and advisor, and there's always been a time limit.

To clarify, I meant 'potentially interested parties' in the past tense i.e they gained access to the data at the outset, but declined to take it further.

RK, a time limit is imposed. Potentially interested parties don't want to remain bound by the insider rules and the company wouldn't want to continually update the room with price sensitive information if it's known someone doesn't have an ongoing interest.

Btw, this isn't to say they don't like the asset, just that they want to see it de-risked.

RK, my assumption is that they would have been invited into the Data Room, it seems inconceivable that they weren't, and, given the absence of a deal, decided not to progress. They've had a very long time to look in detail at Cascabel and nothing has emerged. Surely, this tells us something?

Q, the chairman has said there's been too much focus on M&A over the past two years. My assumption is that we received a number of value suggestions, none of which were acceptable to the board. In other words, they've been doing their job of protecting shareholders.

The strategy set by the board of pushing Cascabel up the value chain was not their preferred option, but they had little choice. It seems the new guys are pursuing a very similar path, but have shifted the emphasis to Tandy as a route to offering interested parties a quicker route to production, thus enhancing our value. They have also pushed ExploreCo up the agenda details of which should emerge in the next couple of months.

M&A is not off the table, but for the time being it's not the main focus of attention. I think the only caveat to this is the possibility of a jv, and for me, Jiangxi will be the partner.

China's ever expanding economic imperialism never stops. In the meantime the West contents itself with moaning about the threat posed by the land grab, but does very little about it. In fact, every western nation puts as many hurdles as possible in front of potential mines in their jurisdictions. Nimbyism on a grand scale, supported by the philosophy that we don't need to support mining in our own countries because we are all part of the global economy. How hollow that looks now.

Talk about playing the fiddle while Rome burns...

Eloro, like everyone else I'm frustrated by the wasted years and vast quantities of cash. I blame this on a lack of a clear strategy, hubris, and poor management.

As you know, I felt differently about Caldwell, mainly because there was a clear strategy which we could all see and understand.

I was surprised by the change, but before writing them off I'll wait to see how they intend to progress.

I was greatly encouraged by Pbow's discussion with Smith, who he rated very highly.

So, just like Caldwell they need to put flesh on the bones of their original statement and we need to give them time to deliver.

BTW, the two blokes in charge are not paupers and I don't believe for one moment that this is a lifestyle company. I'm expecting some action soonish and let's hope it doesn't disappoint.

It's Jiangxi buying more in the market. RNS on Thursday.

I just made that up, so it has the same validity as any other conspiracy theory.

The actual trade size was 197,897,670 with a value of £1.4m and it was off-book. So it's probably not our shorter.

If it was them closing their position I think we can all allow ourselves a very loud chortle. Less so if they've doubled it.

RT, there was no need to RNS it as it falls outside the requirements of what is and isn't necessary. In any event, I seem to recall he mentioned it in one of those online interviews.

Regardless of whether it should or shouldn't have been announced, the simple fact is the data room exercise did not deliver what everyone hoped it would...sadly.

Btw, I can't recall if it was you or Fort who said shareholder approval should have been sought before the disposal of the CGP shares. Again, there was absolutely no regulatory requirement for this given that it was only a small transaction, and it involved shares already in issue.

Rodney, because we spent all that time with various parties in the Data room and nothing emerged. What more proof do you need?