Member Info for Canary3

WF- I absolutely agree with that and thats what i hope will happen, the downside of borrowing is that when you are forced borrower, and that is us, lenders will take at least a pound of flesh and more if they can.

NCM will want to see that we have the wherewithal to fully participate in the next stage. So we need to have the facility even if we don't use it.

I am being very cautious and if that costs me a couple of points on the SP then thats the price,.

I am still very bullish and hold just below 7 figures after my sales.

I bought aggressively when we were in the 12’s and 13’s last time around, i have sold most of them recently at about B/E, that of course means my average is now back to where it was.

My thinking is that interest rates are still going up, the US 10 year hit 3% yesterday, the OZ 10yr is 3.13. If rates are rise by another 1% or more then IMO the 10 year rates will go up again.

I think that the chances of an equity raise become greater as rates increase, borrowing will be getting progressively more expensive and banks typically reign in their borrowing / make it more punitive when rates rise / inflation strikes.

The oldies here (Thats me) can remember the period 72 to 82 when inflation averaged well into double figures, the bank rates during that time in the UK were from 1979 to 1991 rarely below 10% averaging 12% or so, then from 1991 to 2001 three times below 6% the rest above.

I think rates will go up very aggressively over the next 6 months and we will see 4/5 % 10 years quite soon, borrowing will then be very expensive.

So a mix of the 5% , debt and equity is getting more likely IMO, i don't want to buy any more shares to hold my position, so if there is a raise i will buy and if there isn’t I will lose a bit buying back in those ones that i have sold.

Market conditions are changing fast so my thinking is to lower my risk a little.

Thats just my view on where borrowing might end up.

Sometimes when you get this stuff from CEO’s it can be deliberately vague to suggest something that may or may not happen, in order to generate interest that might otherwise not be there.

With the new man on Board i cannot believe that MM would say stuff like this if it is not absolutely true, so it's worth holding to the denouement IMO.

There is an ability to extend discussions if both parties agree to an extension, at some point one or the other may say let's go to arbitration.

If and when that happens i think there will be an RNS to the market.

The 10 year in the UK has more than tripled since July last year, the US 10 year has more than doubled and the OZ ten year has almost quadrupled.

OZ is highest at over 3%

These rates were last seen in 2015 and if they revert back to around 2010 they will going a lot higher.

Thing are going to get tighter on the lending front IMO and so getting better rates that the current 8% on the NCM debt will be bit of a challenge. IMO

I will be glad when we have our funding sorted.

NCM had 3.2 Billion US of cash and unused credit facilities at Feb 22 , this will be impacted by Pretium Resources acquisition, so IMO they are not going to have loads of cash to throw around.

IS there a cash rich predator around for NCM? / GGP. ?

Things will get very interesting quite soon..

I’ll see you at the ranch Hoss

The 5% needs to unlock bank funding and even if it does repay the debt to NCM we need banks to fund on a PFS, apparently the first time ever.

So it's very important in the short term and in the long term , IMO NCM will be all over it and things may not go straightforwardly.

But i hope they will and as SD is a finance man that gives me a lot of comfort as thats the crucial skill set for our CEO right now.

SD said perhaps there will be a chance to revise first principles of the JV , that comment acknowledges IMO that the JV and the terms included were written when GGP had little or no in-house expertise so presumably relied on consultants, i also suspect that it was written with all parties expecting GGP to be bought or HAV sold in its entirety at some future point.

So again IMO, the document will have been rather hastily produced and the terms not fully thought through, and TBF there would have be no idea of the scale the discovery.

So we have seen that GGP are bound by the terms on the remains 5%.

However, NCM will be extremely concerned about the processing deal, 10% margin on top of costs is a terrible deal for them IMO, and with GGP looking and acting like a professional mining company as opposed to an exploration company, NCM will need to open and transparent about the processing costs.

SO NCM are bound by the JV to process 25% of the total ore recovered for a 10% margin, the numbers people in NCM and analysts that follow NCM will be appalled. IMO

GG p have plenty of leverage in negotiations going forward

Pete Jh - Thanks for your reasoning and as you are not that far off Hydro i find that a bonus.

I always worry about debt, lost many a copper by thinking all would be ok and it wasn’t.

I was thinking about it quite a lot as well as being happy with the overall picture going forward.

Thnaks all...I am a little skeptical sometimes of companies following the need to be duty bound, I have seen many weaselling around their duty, Hopefully that will be Ok

Also Jerry - the 25% more aggressive is very reassuring come the detailed negotiations, as it will help the teams stick to their numbers.

If i am wrong about that i will be very happy...

also

NCM have not said they accept GGPs new MRE even though they had a copy 3 weeks prior to publishing, No doubt they will have a plan to counter it..and of course GGP will stand full square behind it.

Arbitration is still not off the table IMO and perhaps the broker note got it right that it will be a long and difficult process.

Time will tell.

IMO Hydro’s figures are way too big.

SD said we would need the 5% plus bank debt to get to the 125 required. He also said that we will have to deal with the 50 millions debt before banks will lend.

He also said it would be a first to get funding from a PFS, so with only Non - binding term sheets agreed there clearly is till a long way to go.

He also said to some posters present that we wold be shocked by the figure presented by NCM to start the discussion.

There is along way to go before we know how the finances will be resolved.

I hope will go smoothly but it is conern

I don't think Newcrest is an Unrelated party and it is 75% of GGP onwership of Hav. not 75% of Hav in total

So NO

IMO 75%

Sorry or selling 75% plus of HAV to someone else and GGP keeps going.

A transaction would need to happen.

At a Guess, Pacific have been looking to protect their position should GGP be taken over by anyone other than Newcrest.

So as part of any takeover the shares to pacific would be issued and given to Pacific.

An alternative question.

What gives you most comfort for the uses of GGp going forward

What keeps you awake at night / you give most attention to currently

question.

What are the three things/ issues that you think are most important to the future success of GGP

and

What were your most recent actions to drive them forward.

On the 5%, I am fairly sure that NCM have 30 days to accept or pass on the deal , After the price has been agreed.

the negotiations to agree the price can carry on as long as needed as long as both parties agree to the extensions, if they don't agree to extensions it then goes to arbitration.

Hopefully we will get some news in the next couple of weeks.

Interestingly to me with zero happening regarding volume , it is still very easy to sell high numbers, TBF i could do that when the price was 16 or 18 so it doesn't really matter unless you want to sell.

Following the discussion on GDX the other day , i looked bit more into ETF’s.

There has been a lot of work done on ETF performance V a mutual fund holding the same stocks in the Staes, and it transpires that ETF’s have a lower rate of return that the mutual fund holding the same securities.

This happens some financial players , front run the changes in the ETF’s, by their nature ETF’s are transparent and publish their holdings as well as their mandates and so on. Whilst mutual funds only report occasionally.

This allows said financial players to take positions prior to the rebalancing of the ETF. They use Algos to predict the changes and go long or short on the securities that will be changed in the rebalance and so make some money. ( or Alpha as they like to say)

The mainly target single issue ETF’s like oil , gas and so on.

In America and Australia the regulators have allowed ETF providers to introduce Opaque or non transparent ETF’s to counter this and so raise their investors returns.

EU and UK not so far.

I wonder if any posters are familiar with the detailed workings of this activity, i may have misunderstood the articles

Americanism!!