We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Whether Newmont wants to sell Hav or not we should bring out our own resource update. We need it desperately as it’s been delayed up to now. It will have zero impact on any valuations as both companies know results far ahead of us and the price will be the price, based on all info to date. It’s business as usual for GGP and we shouldn’t get caught up in the sale of NCM as we have no control of any of it.
I have difficulty understanding how all the talk of Hav doubling in size since the last cut off and a fraction of a fraction of the ore body currently being used and yet being told not to expect too much on the next update. Which is why we need this update! The FS and DTM are largely out of our control, but a resource update is.
The only way any of this works for me is if we own the parent company! I’m not interested in being pushed aside after waiting all these years!
Not that we know the structure at this time, so it’s a waiting game for confirmation.
You have to question the motives behind the article, we can all choose a point of view which best relates to our argument. Whatever the definition we can be sure we own the company. It’s our vote that is required for a sale or our shares if trying to take a controlling stake. Agreed it doesn’t give us automatic right to wander into the head office and do as we please, unless of co**** I have a controlling stake in which I can do as I please, in which I would be called the owner!
Shareholders own the company full stop. Owners of share certificates are on the company register, where as nominees aren’t and instead grouped under brokers nominees accounts. The problem being the latter are sometimes disadvantaged due to the fact companies are not required to deal direct with those shareholders, this leaves the brokers with the power as to whether they pass the right to votes and such like.
That’s not to say shareholders have have sole right, since they fall behind creditors and such like if a company was to cease trading. Also shareholders delegate the BOD to run the company on their behalf.
Still, it’s the shareholders that own the company.
Not sure I share you view on Starbright. Always has a negative slant on GGP.
In particular I don’t understand their view on how expensive Hav could be, are we not in touching distance of the ore body to which the project becomes largely self funding.
No doubt the person is very knowledgeable, but comes across as slightly arrogant and begs the question why they invested when they did, if they even did, given the risk they point out.
Panama, morning to you too, your right of co**** that it’s going to be mined by someone, whether we own 30 or 100% as the project is to far along.
The resource upgrade and FS/DTM is of little concern to NCM as they hold all the cards on the timings, but to us it’s all transformational and needed for us to grow.
I know it’s only a matter of time but I’m fed up with our so called partners dragging their heels in this matter.
It could be argued that NCM could be misleading the market or shareholders. They are building a mine in every way, along with all the associated costs, yet are refusing to rubber stamp the project. Indeed they were very vocal up to the 5% negotiations and have now gone totally cold over any enthusiasm.
It’s like me building a large extension on my house that’s nearly finished and telling the neighbours I’m still considering building one.
Every man and his dog can see what’s going on, so why not be honest and release all info.
It would require an act of God for this not to get mined now.
IMHO
Totally agree Jiffy, if our BOD acted in the same way I’d be annoyed. Luckily GGP seem up for a fight should a similar scenario played out.
It will be interesting to see SD’s reaction tomorrow and in any subsequent interview to gain an insight as to what may be going on behind the scenes.
Jiffy, what would be the point of any games on NCM’s part seeing as their fate seems sealed, unless they have handed the batten for the potential new owners.
Must admit I never understood why Newcrest allowed Newmont access behind the scenes, unless they are hiding stuff. You would think they would have told them to go away and come up with a serious offer or they will not engage.
Although we have no idea what the total 2023 divi will be, we can assume it should be at least 60p.
As per results:
For 2022, the Board proposes a final dividend of 60p per share to be paid on 5 May 2023 to shareholders on the register on 14 April 2023, following shareholder approval at the AGM. This dividend is the final and only dividend in respect of financial year 2022.
•
For 2023, the Board's intention is to at least maintain the 2022 dividend per share with a view to growing this over time. As previously announced, payments will be made semi-annually and the Board intends to pay an interim dividend in the second half of this year in relation to 2023.
My hope going forward is that they pay a small special divi, as and when the market allows now that they have reset the dividends to more manageable levels. Fingers crossed!
My understanding is that upon death (before 75) the beneficiary has two years to take a lump sum, tax free. However, if the beneficiary decides to leave money in the SIPP and elect to take an income then it’s treated as tax free and the two year deadline doesn’t apply. From what I read it doesn’t necessarily mean you have to take the income from that point but instead take it when you want. The emphasis being, I presume, that whatever the person decides, the lump sum or income, you have to declare it before the two year rule. As Trotsky says, moving funds from a SIPP to an ISA make it liable for IHT
It’s also important to point out things can change so check before making the big decision.
Wouldn’t it be easier all round if CP just raised the cash to buy us all out, then long suffering shareholders can move on once and for all and he is free to do what he wants.
5p per share or similar?
Indeed, they have a strange strategy and if I were one of their shareholders I’d be annoyed. If they are up for sale then why conduct it behind closed doors. Why not update all your assets with latest results and tell the world, at least then you would potentially get a better price or a bidding war. As it is they could agree a price without the shareholder knowing what exactly they will be voting to give away.