Member Info for antigua18

Paddy, with respect, the 5% has a cut off date for results so in theory it shouldn’t make any difference if he keeps talking it up. It’s also worth noting SB changed well before December clause activation. Further more why hold back the resource update if not to try and manipulate the price.
How can people dismiss what’s in plain sight so easily or is it they don’t want to see it.

It doesn’t bother me one way or another if he’s chatty or not as long as he pays a fair price, after all he’s not our CEO.
Just out of curiosity do you think as SB does that the updated MRE and the 5% are nothing to do with each other?

Bamps, while I respect it’s your view, I don’t think it’s a conspiracy theory when the fella had to come out and apologise for his style of management making people feel bullied. You probably put that down to strong leadership, but I regard it as bullying someone they believe is in a weaker position. I will take our man over NCM any day of the week.

SB was constantly bigging up the amazing exceptional grades we are finding or words to that effect. Yet he’s relatively quiet on that front these days. Have these grades evaporated or disappeared or has he gone silent while negotiations take place? Or is this a coincidence?
You’ve said on many occasions how big this is, has your view changed. If not then it would suggest he is playing a game.

Panama, the trouble is SB isn’t looking after his shareholders. Nearly all shareholders want increasing dividends and modern CEO’s have very different ideas and promise jam tomorrow. You only need look at BP, Lloyds, TW etc that want to keep divi’s lower and do share buybacks and the like, which is at odds with shareholders. NCM shareholders patience has ran out with all his acquisitions of late and a warning to them when you stop listening.
All this could be part of the reason for his change of tone of late with the realisation that he’s over stretched the company in the eyes of his own investors.

Red, as difficult as it is for private investors to stomach seeing the games, it’s just the cut throat world of business.
In regards NCM and SB getting us of the ground speedily, your quite correct, however it’s worth baring in mind, it’s no selfless act on their part. If you flip it round then we are saving them a sxxt load of money not having to close or mothball Telfer. So I find the thought that we somehow owe them something strange. However It’s also only fair to say that without their investment it would be very difficult if not impossible for us to do it on our own.
So it’s probably better to say equally advantageous to both parties.

Dip, think that’s a good assessment of the situation but I would add that some NCM posters may just be slightly hostile of GGP shareholders asking annoying questions in their eyes, much the same as the response we give here to posters that are not invested or cross ramping.

On the Sandeep front I’m quite hostile toward him now, especially with how he’s been with us recently. I’ve seen him in many interviews/conferences and feel he comes across as arrogant in the way he responds sometimes, especially when he doesn’t like the question. As you say we have a smart CEO who engages well and comes across as warm and welcoming which is the opposite from SB.

I’m hoping that SB’s attitude will change once the 5% sorted as I suspect it’s probably souring the relationship between the two at present.

Thoughtful post as always Panama, Sandeep is game playing to keep the potential price down. This leaves him backed into a corner by his own arrogance giving him a massive quandary. If he carries on downplaying then it leaves little chance of getting any buyout past his shareholders and even less with a ball offer to us. Happy days for us as it means we’re going mining.

If he truly wants the lot then he will surely have to up the resource and potential to demonstrate its worth to the company and the shareholders. In which place he’s going to have to splash the cash to get the lot.
All this assuming it’s as big as our guys are saying.
IMHO

Thanks for the reply. Discussions between news always go round in circles. Perpetual ground hog day.
Let’s hope results next week spark a new topic.

Was that aimed at me TT, if so I made the a similar point earlier about the 5% being right at the time!
I disagree with you about it being pointless discussion since we are still dealing with it and hasn’t been resolved.
I get your frustration however.

Thanks MFU, I’m often considered on here as having negative views which I consider unfair and would say I’m cautiously optimistic. Many pieces to this jigsaw puzzle and may be some time before we get the true picture.
As with David and Goliath the little guy can win with the right strategy. Lol
Our Shaun is the right man in my view and we’ve come a long way since the early days, so expect a fight if any shenanigans from NCM.

MrEMC2, unreasonable is a poor choice of word on my part, but you get my meaning.

Criticism of the 5% being in the contract is probably unreasonable. It no doubt served both parties at the time and should be seen as an insurance. It theoretically guaranteed a monetary amount to contribute our share of the mining cost and avoids a stalemate while we try to raise funds. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but nobody could have predicted at the time the contract was drawn just how big this is. The mistake is clearly the fine print that allows NCM to use a cut of date that doesn’t reflect true scale. Lesson learned hopefully for any future agreements.

Bamps, apologies if you thought I was trying to misrepresent what you said. Your summary is a correct reflection on what’s happening and tempering expectations of the near term resource upgrade and I pointed out in my opinion it was NCM’s plan to slow things down. To avoid any confusion these are my views alone.
I always enjoy and appreciate your posts and technical analysis, keep it up :-)

In regard to the issues of the decline, I feel the difference language between the two parties is pretty telling. The blunt account of the situation from NCM ( heavy handed approach) and the discussions and full explanation (including change of design to mitigate issues)from SD. NCM are using the delay/situation to their advantage or they think they are above this and don’t need to comment.

IMHO

Bamps, I’m only expressing my view and certainly not twisting what you say. That makes me sound like I’m attacking you or have an agenda? I have long expressed my concern at NCM’s behaviour but was dismissed as a troublemaker, citing what great friends we are and they have their reputation. Let’s not forget how SB used to put Hav front and centre and the various superlatives he used to use when talking about it in various interviews, Yet he’s now luke warm. This is clearly a change of tack on their part and has nothing to do with any issues, although I fully agree that this will take time and will most likely advance quicker once the decline is completed and allows drilling underground.

It seems to be switching from a partnership to an uneasy alliance. I have no doubt Shaun and the team are busy countering this change in behaviour and will stand up to any bullying that may be going on.

I realise I will be unpopular for saying this, but the future is definitely not nailed on. This is an amazing find and I for one don’t want to be squashed by our big brother.

Agreed Jiffy, I have a slight issue with the decline. Since it will have been meticulously planned I’m surprised they have been caught out with poor ground conditions. Especially with all the drilling having gone on, surely the core samples would have shown exactly what they were facing and given them the opportunity to plan accordingly. May be pure coincidence but the timing does raise questions. However I will concede I, probably over thinking it.

As you say Matty, they are only obligated to look after their own shareholders and as such will only want to pay rock bottom. At this time they don’t need to show the true size and you correctly point out they have less urgency. By switching to growth drilling over infill then any results can’t be used to increase the resource.
Their actions of late only further my suspicions. I would have thought the 5% would have been a done deal for what they are getting, not only are they paying for something with a cut off date despite growing considerably in future, but also getting the magic 75% for control of the project.
The question, are NCM playing hardball or is GGP refusing to roll over. By refusing to release an updated resource then SB denying the 5% and upgrade are not connected only serves to show what I say to be correct.

Your summary Bamps is NCM’s plan to hold back GGP’s value, in my opinion. Part of their plan if you will, to conveniently stifle results. They have what they need to progress the mine and justify the cost/expense based on the HGZ.
Conspiracy theory I hear you say, but ask yourself what would be to NCM’s advantage at this time to prove up more resource and pay more for the 5% or even a final takeover.
We are facing manipulation on two fronts!

Dip, I wish NCM would make their intentions known. They desperately want the 5% but don’t want to pay fair price and are dragging it out it seems. It’s difficult to see them wanting or allowing GGP to go into production.

Totally agree Red, Panama always post sensible thoughts and considerations. You also make some good points.
It’s difficult to see any negatives with this share, but as I’ve said before we need to be alert to what’s really going on here. They, whoever they are, don’t want us to get our rewards and are working hard to destroy and demoralise fellow Pi’s.
My thoughts are that NCM are playing a part in this and my biggest concern is of some throwing the towel in, but with so many of us hopefully we can resist any poor offer. I fundamentally don’t trust Ncm anymore following recent behaviour and expect the games to carry on to the FS and beyond.

I was lucky enough to sell 25% @ 36p as needed the funds but felt extremely guilty about cashing in some chips. The hype on here was bad at the time.
In the end I didn’t need all my released funds so ploughed the spare money back in the low 20’s thinking as many thought that we had reached the lows, only to watch it drop considerably.
Then the chorus from certain posters changed again to say it was never worth being in the 30’s or even mid 20’s and people were foolish to believe it was. Posters can seem very fickle which is why I Would take with a pinch of salt any disclosure of share holding.

Listen to your own gut feeling and do what’s right for you and don’t be swept along with the sit on hands when some are doing the opposite.