Member Info for addicknt

Yes, nal, I did. I take it you accept companies are dynamic entities and power bases periodically shift? There's no question he was sidelined during the post-CGP merger period. I suppose the question now is, has he wrested back influence? Why was he engaged in a frenetic bout of lobbying recently if he was in such a strong position?

I see Vujcic as probably being a strong personality and will he simply sit back and let NM pull the strings? It doesn't seem that likely. My only hope is that wherever the power sits now I just hope they can work with the Board to re-establish some stability and to provide us with a clear strategy. I think we're all totally fecked-off with these boardroom shenanigans and just want these characters to get on with their jobs and to deliver some value.

Incidentally, good to see you weren't washed away in the cyclone.

Eloro, at last, you and I are pretty much in the same camp!

I don't think I've ever come across a company which has had the same unerring ability to shoot itself in the foot at every turn. We've got such a great asset - which is the only reason so many of us are still here - and yet whichever Board we've had they manage to feck the whole thing up. And who is the only Board member who's been in situ for the whole time? One guess.

Did he give you a call to let you know?

I'll say one thing for you, you've got a pretty wild imagination. Some may even say it borders on insanity.

Oh no! Another Rachel from accounts!

Pbow, I know nothing about the man, but hopefully he's up to the task.

Most of us will have worked in environments which have been subjected to disruption and major change and will know the impact this can have. I've experienced this three times in my career, twice when I was recruited to conduct turnarounds. The immediate staff response is always suspicion and fear for their jobs. It takes time, effort and leadership skills to win people's confidence and support. I sincerely hope Vujcic possesses these attributes, because the company will need them, both to gain internal support and, critically, suppport from our external partners, major shareholders and other stakeholders.

Eloro, I think that's the only sensible position to adopt.

We must hope/pray that they've made this move whilst already having a clear plan of action. If they haven't, they're going to make themselves look bloody stupid and will further damage our already battered credibility.

I think we can make one firm assumption; FN were consulted beforehand and have bought into the arrangement - it's possible they instigated it. It's inconceivable that it was just sprung on them. I'm also making an assumption the relevant government officials were told - this is critical to the path forward.

Changing the subject slightly, were does Mather fit into this? What was really going on at the pub meeting? Why was he engaged in what appeared to be a lobbying/scare exercise? Has he got what he wants? Or is he back home in Oz throwing the furniture around?

Various reports on Telegram suggest he and Vujcic seemed very relaxed together, but apparently so did Caldwell. Did Caldwell know what was coming and had agreed to the plan, or was he completely blindsided by the whole thing? Incidentally, I bet their presence in London was chairman related and this is where Smith was confirmed as the preferred candidate.

I'd also like to know who is actually running the show in Quito at the moment? Apparently Caldwell was in Miami whilst PDAC was on, so has he already packed his bag and done a runner from Quito?

Finally, both Vujcic and Smith have really strong finance and M&A experience, but they will need to rely heavily on the new COO to do the gritty stuff. If they get the wrong man we're fecked.

I supported him because I bought into the strategy, albeit due to the absence of a viable alternative, and because he represented a semblance of stability which has been lacking for so long.

These new people have not offered anything new and have merely reiterated the same strategy, whilst giving some vague words about speeding things up but without telling us how or why they weren't already doing it.

So how is this better? All it seems to have achieved is to disrupt the company, yet again. For me, until they produce something tangible the jury's very much out.

Rich, I don't think for one moment that he will. I'm more interested in Vujcic putting his hand in his pocket.

We won't see Scott buying any more shares, but what about Vujcic and Smith? As far as I'm aware Vujcic doesn't own any. If he gets an option package without any purchases in the market I think we'd have every right to feel aggrieved.

I suppose there's the off-chance that we're in another Close period, but if not he should put his hand in his pocket.

SM, it looks that way and it begs the question, what has happened, or not happened, in the short space of time since the AGM where SC received full backing from those who bothered to vote?

Two of the other reasons I supported SC were stability and a clear strategy. It doesn't appear the strategy has changed, although the RNS may have been another smokescreen, and it's impossible to see how this improves stability.

The whole thing is very odd, but I suspect we're going to see some new developments fairly soon.

There must have been a reason for the change and I'd like to know what it was, although we probably never will.

DBW, finance people are notorious for not being transparent, so I'd be surprised if these two are.

Yes, the ExploreCo thing is intriguing and I sincerely hope they've already got an idea of what they're going to do. Bear in mind, we were told this was one of the options under consideration when the SR was announced just over a thousand years ago.

Q,

1) The finance is already in place, it simply has to be unlocked by achieving the milestones. We don't need a board dominated by finance people to do that. Yes, if we continue pursuing the development route, we will require the extra funds, but we're not at that point yet and in any event we've proved our ability to raise cash with Scott in situ.

2) Agreed. FN said at the outset that they'd be proactive and I don't doubt that they are.

3) We can employ as many mining experts as we want, but I thought GMining were in charge of that?

Something is going on, or is about to, and the Board/FN felt SC wasn't the right bloke to manage it. This isn't change for change sakes, and for me it's all rather mystifying.

Reading the various posts over the past few days and looking at the market reaction, it seems most people appear fairly indifferent towards the changes, and I'm pretty much in the same camp. I suppose part of the problem is that we've had too many changes and most of us are inured to the whole thing.

The strange thing is this one could be significant. The composition of the board is dominated by finance people, none of whom are, or will be, based in Quito. We've been down this route before with Mather and for me the mismanagement which occurred -4m going walkabout and a directionless strategy - demonstrated why we need the most senior people in situ. That was one of the reasons I was in favour of Scott.

I also suspect the indifference is due to two things: 1) We don't really know why it's happened and whether or not it was contentious and 2) How exactly are they going to speed things up.

As far as the first point is concerned, are we behind on the schedule and FN demanded change? Did Scott agree to the whole thing (the fact he's staying on as CEO suggests he did)? Why hasn't he been kept onboard as COO? He has the government contacts which are essential. Are we engaged in discussions with third parties and it was felt SC wasn't the right person to conclude a transaction? Did the government feel we aren't progressing quickly enough and demanded change?

As far as point two is concerned, I look forward to being told exactly how they intend to speed things up. There's no point simply making a bland statement, which is what the RNS was, and then failing to tell shareholders how they're going to do it. Or is it the case they don't actually know yet? I suggested yesterday that if they already know the answers, why didn't they push ahead with them? Vujcic was on the Board for heavens sake.

They really are going to have put some flesh on the bones before it convinces anyone.

The final point concerns Mather and the frenetic lobbying. Is this what he feared, or is this actually what he wanted? Have we heard the last of it, or is it just about to start? I believe one or two folk on here are in regular contact with him and I'd welcome their views.

Overall, until we're given some detail I remain non-plussed.

TI, let's hope so, although I still don't understand why the board, which had the expertise, didn't pursue this route. Was Vujcic silent?

Red, I agree, they both seem highly credible individuals, particularly in the field of finance and M&A. The question I have is how exactly do they propose to accelerate the process? What precisely was it the team weren't doing? Obviously, they've mentioned bringing in an 'active' partner, but this doesn't really answer the question. What would the partner do differently?

If the answer is obvious, why weren't we already doing it, as I'm sure Vujcic has had plenty of time to give the board his thoughts?

It's not really relevant, but I wonder if the changes came about without Caldwell knowing about it. According to all accounts he seemed relaxed, happy and confident at the pub meet - unlike Mather - so did he already know and was content with it, or was it sprung on him in the manner of DC?

Pbow, you're right, NEDs are not employees and neither is he a Bad Leaver. Does he have the right to exercise his share options within the 90 day period even though he's no longer classified as an employee?

Does anyone think that the new appointments are anything other than an interim arrangement? Do we really believe these two guys, one based in Australia, the other in Switzerland, are actually going to spend the next x number of years developing and constructing Cascabel? I don't.

The mention of bringing in an 'active' jv partner appears to signal the true intention. Will this partner take management control of the project, or will it become similar to the GGP/Newcrest deal?

Incidentally, I wonder how long we'll have to wait until they tell us how much Vujcic is getting paid? At least there won't be any justification for giving him a 10k per month living allowance. Additionally, SC should lose his options, although this may be difficult unless there was a clause in the options agreement which makes reference to them being conditional on him being an executive officer.

The thinking on Telegram is that this probably relates to Bramederos.

Thanks Pbow. I find it much easier to follow stuff on here rather than on Telegram. It must be an age thing!

Swanley, good one!