Member Info for Ant1986

So you're are saying, this stock will go up and down with the gold price? Thanks for that insight. Filtered.

Please can you point to that, because I cannot see it. In fact, I see the opposite: "As a result guidance for the year remains unchanged and we continue to target the upper end of the production range of 540,000 - 600,000 ounces of gold at a total cash cost of between US$925 - US$975 per ounce sold." That means profit now. And now. And also now.

Yup. Legal action being taken against former non executive, I'm sure he made it all up... Not sure why they are bringing forward the half year results, there must be something in it, another way to weaken the SP? I think they should be forced to show on 1st so that KAZ shareholders have a fresh view before they vote. Bitter. Me? :)

Very poor, in my view.

I got a reply from my MP who stated he has forwarded my concern to David Lidington, Minister of State at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office. I also spotted a major investment group are lobbying the same thing with their trillion pound buying power, probably a bit more leverage than me :) KAZ is a dog at the moment, I could see it going the other way, right down to 150-200, trust is the major variable weighing it down. I still have to laugh at the reasons KAZ gave for accepting this offer.

Learning to play the harp isn't as productive as informing your MP of something you think needs addressing. This is a global company listed on the FTSE 100, London, UK not a domestic company in a foreign market. If it gets accepted or not, is down to another company, nothing to do with the number of protesters. That company is so tightly linked that it has to place a "special waiver" in place to stop the normal RULES applying in order to agree a deal without the backing of ENRC's independent committee, put in place to protect mugs like me. Another RULE they have circumnavigated. Bored of talking about the money aspect. Feel free to ignore this post and the situation, ignorance tends to pacify most.

Thanks for your support, I too am glad there are members such as yourself that post honestly and with insight/ objective opinion. This issue will hopefully not blow over, and as I think it has hit a few people higher up the food chain, it might not.

I object a little to the alternative route being suggested as the manly way. I think it's also too easy to dismiss the importance of an investor in business and that an MP wouldn't care. An unregulated market becomes a dangerous economic problem if people feel too fearful to support UK listed businesses. Japan is a good example of what happens if people squirrel their money into their mattresses. Like I've already stated, I'm resigned to losing my money, I've got over that, but the principal remains. "Bad things happen when good people do nothing".

Voice my concern in a meaningful environment in a constructive debate with the view of prompting change in the future. Specifically, I don’t believe there is a lot that can be done to block the progress of the “takeunder”, however I would hate to stand and watch it happen without protest so that it may happen with ease this time or again with another company at a later date.

According to Joyce, on Wednesday morning – the day he was scheduled to ask the Prime Minister a question in Parliament about ENRC – the West End law firm Mischon de Reya sent him a letter referring to the comments he made on 23 May. So they can use the law to get what they want but not abide to it when it doesn't suit? All we can do is apply pressure on our own MP's

Thanks for your support Silver, good to see others having strong principals about this too.

Mentioning no names, I clocked this as well, looks very dodgy to me too.

http://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/2013/06/27/shares/news-and-analysis/questions-for-authorities-in-enrc-scandal-kXcZQ8iDPuqt14xs4wTiQL/article.html

Not so much rage as a sense of injustice. I wouldn't contemplate waving my losses in front of my MP, it's the overriding principal here. Could you even imagine how some of the Kazak people employed by ENRC who may have shares feel? I'm in the same "bunker" as you and I actually haven't lost a great deal, enough to upset me but I'll bounce back in 3-4 months.

I've actually just written to my MP. "Dear Mr Rutley, I am writing to you to raise my concern regarding the impending Prime Minister’s visit to Kazakhstan during what has been a testing time for their large global businesses here in the UK. Specially, as a minority investor with a small interest in Euroasian Natural Resource Corporation (ENRC), I find myself resigned to an unfavourable “takeunder” bid by their current owners and the Kazak government. Much of the information I’m sure a man of your background would already know and as it has been ubiquitous in the press recently, however, I currently feel that ENRC has a) defrauded its investors b) acted in such a way to attract SFO action c) been too greedy to give away its legal requirement of free float shares d) used all of the above as leverage to blackmail its minority investors (and apparently a 26% major, Kazakhmys) into accepting a price far below its value. And on top of all this, the Kazak government are fully compliant and party to the deal, even after disregarding ENRC’s independent board committee. Whilst I understand I’m a relatively insignificant investor, I’m alarmed by the lack of intervention and legislation protecting investors such as myself from the power and greed of a corrupt FTSE100 listed company. Please understand this isn’t sour grapes, this is a matter that if allowed to progress creates serious question marks for many other investors threated with delisting if insubordinate." Yours sincerely,

100% agree and we shouldn't beat ourselves up for believing in business principals and legislation here. I also smell a rat with KAZ and wouldn't entertain them, they are still tied into the government directly and indirectly. This might appear to be cutting my nose off to spite my face but I wouldn't make generalisations about Kazakstan if the government weren't so closely involved.

I have no suggestions, however I do feel this is being brushed far too easily away. Essentially, what has happened is that a company has a) defrauded its investors b) acted in such a way to attract SFO action c) been too greedy to give away its legal requirement of shares d) used all of the above as leverage to blackmail its minority investors into accepting a price far below its value. And on top of all this, the Kazak government are happy to jump in on the deal. How can our PM go over there in search of trade relations? We would probably be killed if we made any progress with lobbying and I'm only half joking.

Couldn't agree more. Thanks for the link, probably make more money from selling OUR horse milk. Fancy lobbying the government with me? :)

And talk of a new ftse rule to stop powerful majority shareholders dominating the board room voting.. Too little, too late springs to mind. Kazakstan is now firmly in my investment black book, along with many connected others. So cross with the way this has been able to happen.

I think most will just steer clear of the headache for the sake of a small rise. Good to see Kaz on the rise I suppose.