Member Info for ChirpyCheep

Fanciful.

Ashton, thanks for getting back regarding Thule. Regarding Disko I think I asked a few times if it had been put on the back burner. IMO not necessarily a bad thing if it has, if they can utilise capital more effectively elsewhere and perhaps Thule is an example of that. The question with Disko is have Kobold decided to spend no money for strategic reasons or data reasons ? When RM rejoined he said all the chips would be put on Disko and I guess he realised pretty quickly that it was a blind alley re Kobold hence Greenswitch .So no drilling this year IMO but plenty of other stuff to go out .Any communications on the other assets from RM at the AGM would be appreciated.

Ashton, looks like the chances of drilling at Disko this year are close to nil.Any progress on any of the other assets especially Thule not because it's important but simply because there has been no communication on that asset ?

Rach, you may wish to have a look at the above.

Share price has been decimated since K got involved.

I can't pretend Disko has been managed well by the company, but a clean slate COULD be beneficial.

The only thing that Tetiary Minerals can be greatful for is that you are not a shareholder!

PS JV's companies come and go all the time.

You obviously missed the words particularly hopeful.

Thanks Ashton, as comprehensive as ever.

Your point re Kobold is particuarly pertinent, it is very difficult to see not only how they have advanced Disko but why it took so long for 80M to work out their intentions.

If we are being particuarly hopeful perhaps their removal is a blessing in disguise.

It's good news, imo, because it shows that perhaps Greenland is getting some traction.

However, it is non binding and it's hard to see how any of this money if it materialises flows through to 80M; if it did it's likely an equity swap.

Ashton, it's difficult to see how AA are any more commited to Disko than Kobold.

After all didn't K say the prospectivity of Disko was " compelling " ?

Perhaps you can enlighten me ?

As you know I would choose JL over Disko all day long.

Good post, thank you.

In the last post RM actually said GS was more important than Disko.

He also said that JL was the most important asset in Greenland

One would think RM would therefore put those two horses before the Disko cart .

So why would he do a Placing to fund Disko.

So Hobsons Choice; reduced drilling or reduced control.

You'd think the latter, but it's only a wild guess.

It's a BB so I'd appreciate other wild guesses.

Jimbolina

I am not sure one can take that statement in the RNS literally, I don't think one can take the statement on Thule literally either. It's hard to argue to argue with Ashton but to say Thule is significant doesn't cut it with me. Both look standard text.

I haven't got a Scooby, but because it has got an exploutation license isn't the cost of keeping it minimal .You'd think the decision is almost solely linked to the price of Ilmenite. IvR kindly put some figures out for Dundas but whatver way you look at it it's a big initial cost, especially for Greenland.

Ashton, can't quite see the point ?

Pretty greenfield and they've just got rid of two copper projects !

Seems to me irreconcilable with selling Dundas, which you have suggested may be the next step

Ashton, thanks for posting that research note. It's not knew but doesn't it bear and what some of us have been saying, the non core assets add little value and actually detract from the company as the market believes there are too many mouths to feed. A strategy of Shxt or bust is better than no clear strategy.

LWHL, agreed it does seem like buttons. However and this is not a plug for RM ( I can understand how people feel he has decimated the company ) but when he returned the whole company was only valued at £5m; the sale of Met1 , the Finnish assets and now this is roughly the same figure. So they've done reasonably well on asset sales. Moreover, the BOD have never managed to move anything forward ( no wonder the share price is where it is) so they have needed to rationalise and hopefully they have worked out that the strategy of all these assets one one " platfrorm" aa RE called it has gained no traction in the market. The real question as Zinkly alludes to is whether the new strategy will work; the old one certainly hasn't. We need less projects but to do more with the ones we have.

As an aside I went to the AGM last year and it didn't seem to me that RM had any interest in Kanga; if the question is drilling between Kanga and Disko he thought there was no contest. Again we will see if he is to be proven right.

Rach, your post may have a bit more substance if you remind everybody that Ashton said back in April that he expected Kanger.. as the next asset to be sold . I am sorry but the poor guy can't win, get it wrong he is an optimistic ramper get it right he is a proxy .

Just poking fun, nothing more nothing less.

Rach will be pleased!

Good points re Met1, put what I was sayimg but more articulately.

However, you not know if the " agreement " re selling 80M's shares was superceded by the sale of the Finnish Assets.

Re Aim Regulation nothing will come of it; I am willing to have a wager if you disagree, whereby one of us shuts up for a certain time. Game ?

Hardly surprising; can't see why it's been above 20p with the warrants overhang- and it's a massive overhang

I said the sale was a good idea, purely on the basis of the overhang

Been proven as right as wrong as I am with 80M........................so far.!

IvR, yes it's hard to see AA being a mover in Greenland Nickel.

As regards Indonesia's relentless output it's worth considering that its nickel is low grade and not very green.

Shouldn't therefore be a factor in Disko which also has other metals- Cu and PGE doing well, NI isn't show it should be swings and roundabouts.

IvR, isn't this just Nickel Brazil ?

IMO, just a reaction to BHP as it tries to simplify it's business- rather than a statement on the Nickel market which has tanked anyway.