Member Info for Bott

Prospector, you could not be more wrong. I have been a holder of GG shares since 2007; my first AGM attended was in 2008 and I attended last year. In response to another post - no, I haven't forgotten Newmont. In the early days the known deposits were too small and fragmented to be commercial, but now they are not. The question is, what confidence can we have that the board has its eye on one (or preferably more than one) commercial outcome? It'all very well debating the quality of the drilling results, but at this stage of the business the focus should be on getting the gold out and to market and not waiting for an angel to appear. Consider the costs, in the context of a subdued gold price, rising inflation and talk of a looming global recession: how much is the company really worth, today?

My opinion is based on the almost complete absence of any evidence to show that the board has any plan to turn its discoveries into cash, either through a sale (as Bewarethebrokers suggests) or by establishing a mining unit. The strategy it has laid out, the same as last year, is wholly based on further exploration and drilling to prove what's there. Some of that is necessary of course, but it is a strategy without focus. It would like to 'monetise' its 'key' assets, but for the past two years it has not told us how it plans to do this, so I have come to the conclusion it doesn't know. The primary job of the Chairman therefore is to bring onto the board and perhaps in an executive role one or two people who do. Failing that the chairman should be replaced, which is why I have voted against his reappointment. This lack of focus is a common failing in small companies, especially those, like GG, which find it easy to raise (and spend) money.

Greatland gained an AIM listing in July 2006, raising £1.1m, net of expenses, through a placing at 2p.

This company was launched on AIM in July 2006, with an initial market cap of £3 million and a share price of 2p. At last year’s AGM, the market cap was £56 million, but the share was just under 2p. Today, the market cap has risen to £58 million, but the share price is only 1.8p. This is a dismal record.
One NED resigned last year one day after the AGM. Another was appointed 9 days before the date of the 2017 directors’ report, but this wasn’t reported then. The annual report doesn’t mention why in either case.
The directors have been very good at finding gold in the ground, although at some cost, but completely useless at turning it into money. The chairman should be replaced by someone able to put together a board better able to act in the interest of investors, who want to see some return on their money other than buying on the dips and selling at the tops.

This is a company which after 30 years as a private company has made a loss every year since it went public in 2016. For this achievement, its EDs were paid $11.7m last year (no wonder there was a 33pc vote against the remuneration report, with the NEDs getting $1.1m too). It is cash generative because it collects subscriptions upfront, sometimes for 5 years, but out of $756m of such deferred income only $120m is on the balance sheet. Out of the rest, the board keeps investing in intangible assets, the notional value of which (uncommented on by KPMG) increases every year and now exceeds shareholders’ equity by 900 per cent. It is unquestionably a good business, but hardly a good investment.