Member Info for addicknt

On a slightly more serious note, I wonder if SC is actually quite pleased to hand over the baton? He's 68 and I'm sure this will have been his last CEO role, and I suspect he'd rather not be in Ecuador any longer than he has to be.

That's right. Top place, only the cream accepted.

I imagine nowadays the old poly is probably called something like Kevin Keegan University, or the Ken Dodd Centre for Advanced Learning.

I've just checked his linkedin profile and note we both attended the same university, therefore he must be a good bloke.

Fort, the Swiss sub was set up quite a few years ago. From memory Mather was still in charge.

Cheeky bugger!

And yes, I do mean 'new guy'. He's been an almost invisible presence as an NED and he's got a lot to learn as CEO, even though he has a head start.

I agree with Red, I think his appointment is no more than being an interim measure until some sort of fundamental change occurs.

As far as the management of this company is concerned, in my opinion we've exhausted our options. We can't go through yet another iteration and either these blokes succeed or we end up flogging the asset for peanuts.

Our credibility has never been that compelling and changing management every other year does nothing but diminish our standing. Heaven knows what the government will make of it all.

It often been stated the reason we haven't been able to attract any institutional investors, or rather new investors, has been the lack of a chairman. Ok, we've got one now so please start buying in the market, although heaven knows who they'll buy them from.

Eloro, ha! I'm surprised it took you so long to post.

The fact is I supported him because I believed he was pursuing the right strategy and there didn't appear to be an alternative - this also seems to be the opinion of the new blokes. As I said earlier, I'll be fascinated to hear how they intend to speed matters up. What specific actions will achieve the accelerated turnkey plan?

Anyway, the good news is you and I won't have to engage in endless post-swapping in December!

Pbow, my money would be on the Canadians. I wonder where this leaves Mather's lobbying campaign? Is he in favour of this move, or was this what he objected to? It's difficult to see why he'd object, but then again he's not unknown to have contrary views.

What are the thoughts about an ASX listing? Would it really bring in new investors? Or is it a waste of time and money?

An interesting comment about bringing in 'active participation' from some of our existing shareholders in order to speed up the strategy. Has this already been discussed, or is it merely wishful thinking?

Well, we wanted some meaningful news!

It appears the intention is to provide fresh impetus to the turnkey strategy and to speed matters up - it will be interesting to see how they'll do it.

Personally, I'd liked to have seen ExploreCo spun off in to a separately quoted business, but I guess there were obstacles to this.

The fact is we now have two deal making bankers in charge and surely, at this stage, that's a good thing.

Nal, it is the first time he appears to be on top of something and, with Macron, is leading the response.

Of course, much of the European reaction is undeliverable bluster and I suspect what's going on behind the scenes during conversations with the US are quite different from some of the public pronouncements. Trump does indeed hold all the cards and despite how uncomfortable it is, everyone knows it.

Q, you say you agree with me but then argue that tariffs were a 'major part' in the depression. They weren't.

The impact of tariffs on the modern US economy will be interesting to see. To what degree will they affect the propensity to consume? If the answer is not much, then they will be inflationary and we all know where that leads. However, will US consumers behave in the way Trump hopes and where possible switch to US manufactured products? My guess is the rich won't notice, but for the poorer part of the population it's a different story. It will be ironic if the very people Trump claims to represent are those who suffer most as a result of his policies...and they will be.

Anyway, that's enough of that. Pbow offered an interesting running commentary of PDAC yesterday and it's to be hoped SC was engaged in some meaningful conversations with any interested parties, specifically the Saudis. We could certainly do with some proper news.

Q, there were a number of causes of the Great Depression and it's far too simplistic to claim that tariffs were solely responsible. In fact, of the numerous factors which were in play, tariffs were pretty much bottom of the list.

Having said that, the modern global economy bears little resemblance to that of the 1930s, and what Trump is engaged in is some kind of vast economic experiment. It will be interesting to see where it leads us and more specifically, the American electorate.

Just like his response to Ukraine he's using trade barriers as a threat mechanism and it'll come down to a question of who blinks first. My only hope is that the utterly useless Starmer manages to negotiate a deal for us.

Pbow, thanks.

Frankly, unless there's something new to talk about, which there doesn't appear to be, I don't think it makes any difference if we're presenting or not.

Part of today's schedule is given over to Ecuador Day, organised by the Chamber of Mining.

There's been much confusion as to whether or not we are presenting, does anyone know the definitive answer?

You're far from being alone. This site is full of people who, when seeing a company announce that administration is likely, buy shares in the utterly stupid belief that the company will find a way out. I always find it hilarious when the excrement finally hits the aircon that the very same people squeal like stuck pigs about the unfairness of it all.

Nal, you didn't answer the question; would you invest in a company which you thought would go bust?

Pbow, thank you for this.

Nal, unsurprisingly you miss the point. He's not gambling on a 100 to 1 outsider, instead he's throwing his money away on a bet which, according to him, he believes will fail. There's a difference, but perhaps you can't see it? And I'm pretty damn sure you wouldn't do the same thing. Or would you? How often have you gone into a betting shop and placed a bet on the three legged horse?