The nominated brokers of a listed company are obligated pursuant to the listings rules to offer a a price on both sides in the absence of prices from secondary participants.
It's a back stop rule and it's clear as day to anyone who actually has L2 rather than just talking rubbish about it.
I doubt there's anything left of field, foreshadowing the updates... Another example of duration equalling risk imo.
If you bought on a technical swing trade at the 10.5p with little understanding of the company you're going to sell into 13p without any news all day long.
Anyone on fundamentals patiently waiting for confirmation in the form of project delivery milestones then they're not going to buy in advance of the news. What we end up with is a market of small sellers, selling into market with no buyers.
Full year guidance of 85-90k at 1500 AISC was always a red herring here, AISC to date is circa 1250 and we only need t0 hit circa 33k with the aisc rising to 1750 over the next 6 months to meet it.
HUM advised at the time that they expect to issue a revised guidance in Q3 (so any day basically). Then there's Kor commercial production update, September/October at the latest.
Given that Kor's grade is circa 30% higher than the current Yani profile the aisc at Kor should also be much lower. Personally I think anyone making assumptions based on 2023 guidance are grossly underestimating the actual state of affairs.
Worth bearing in mind that Kor name plate is 1.2 m tonnes and at the end of June it was running at 67% capacity... Even with no further ramp up at 4% grade with 90% recovery its still 93k ounces a year.
It's ludicrous almost to assume that KOR won't be positively contributing through Q3 and Q4.
Both SLP and JLP's pgm operations are reliant on the viability of 3rd party chrome operations. In JLP's case no more fitting example than the DCM mess.