Member Info for ChirpyCheep

No, just JAY- but some money appears to flow from there to here and vice versa- that's why I look, plus they are a very visible He play.

Perhaps what is more relevant is that they have paid $6.4m for 50% of a Helium play.

Might give a line on Outokumpu.

IA, how about enlightening us on one of those replies.

Ashton,

Given the size of the Raise would be logical to think that news on Disko won't be any time soon ?

Ashton, you've lost me. Isn't this the same post as the one at 22.06 last night ?

InvestAce.

Do you know how many shares BDA have ?

I can't remember but it's not many- I guess about 2% , which will obviously be less once WF come on board.

Apparently they are getting short shrift from RM.

Simples;; it's old news.

Don't know, how could I, but could be Limit Orders.

Every little helps

https://www.miningweekly.com/article/zambias-proposed-mining-law-bad-for-investment-miners-say-2024-08-07

As I'm sure most of you know AA and K are here, this will surely put them off.

Https://www.bing.com/search?pglt=41&q=minnesota+weather+month+by+month&cvid=ea5a397a383f488cb1fc6400253ae07b&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqBggBEEUYOzIGCAAQRRg8MgYIARBFGDsyBggCEEUYOzIGCAMQABhAMgYIBBBFGDkyBggFEEUYPDIGCAYQRRhBMgYIBxBFGDwyBggIEEUYPNIBCTEwMjI5ajBqMagCCLACAQ&FORM=ANNTA1&PC=EDGEDSE

Looks pretty cold to me in Winter!

Couple of points.

Cf Groc's Graphite project, has no exploitation license. As I keep saying I am no mining expert but it makes White Flame fair value on this comparison ?

Ok, a few think JAY have paid too much but if RM wasn't involved what would the price of JAY be ,after say a Placing ,0.2 ?

Thanls for clearing that up.

It's a valid point you make.

However, five points

88% of shareholders voted for the transaction so you are in a minority, vocal minority I would add.

This only works for RM if JAY prospers. If JAY go bust , as some on here have suggested, how does this transaction help RM ?

It's about RISK, we don't want all our eggs in one basket- esp considering the potential rewards. No point being greedy

If they have to go to shareholders to raise capital for Disko the higher the share price the better, RM obviously thinks this well help.

It's a good transaction IMO !

Sorry before I reply can you clarify " obliged to pay " please ?

You say the Pulsar and Jameson's Land are "quite different!

Not sure you much evidence to collaborate that , but you are entitled to your view.

Why then did Pulsar apply for Industrial Gas Licenses, which were refused, over Jameson ?

Very helpful post reminding us that White Flame was acquired by the issuance of shares .I am sure most people didn't realise that.

Enuff, fair point abour White Cliff.

You'd think they would have equal priority, but I suppose you have make judgements about who is making the decisions.

Obviously different MD's and they could have diametrically opposed strategies, don't know,

What I would add is that RM is UK not AUS domiciled and with his JAY history you'd think longer term JAY would be his preference.

Sorry what he said not why.

It might help the debate if people understand why RM wants to maintain 51%, and elaborate on why he actually said.

He actually said that majority ownership give JAY greater access to capital markets; he specifically used the example of borrowing.

In fact this was discussed in depth because I mentioned the Enuff's point ( no criticism intended because that point had crossed my mind! ) that would JAY still have majprity ownership of Disko with 51% if K had say 5% of JAY and he scoffed. The answer is yes.

As posters have quite rightly said , theory and practise are quite different and what they can access is difficult to determine.

That's why the amount that K were offering seems such a hefty amount. The 2% of the company is neither here nor there, having alternative forms of capital though is significant.

So my logic says, and this is logic as a punter is that they have three options

1/ sell a small part, either directly or not by participating in fundind in activities, for something like what K originally offered.

2/ maintain full control, either by Placings or other capital

3/ sell a large chunk and look for Free Carry

We will all have our own opinions and we will never know who is right or wrong.. If Disko is as big as they say it is option 3 for me. I guess, and it's only a guess that RM prefers option 1.

Monet- noted your point re threads!

Ashton, thank you for your eloquent reply, as ever.

Apologies if I didn't make self clear.

When I mentioned amalgamatinging Jay's Disko and AAL's Disko I did so from a JAY viewpoing; a smaller slice of a bigger pie makes more sense to me.

However, JAY need AAL more than AAL need JAY.

Moreover, in the current market Majors don't get into bed with Juniors; eg BHP $3.3 billion acquisition of Filo in South America is a good example of what is happening at the moment. So, if AAL got involved, and I am not saying they won't, it will be against the grain.

As regards RM , I was at the same meeting as you and I read it that he definitely didn't want a three way split . Maybe I am wrong but that's how I read it.

I can't profess I liaise with Management much, I will leave that to you. You are much better position to speak to them. However, in one email exchange with ES he said that Disko is so huge " ownership is irrelevant "

So dilution , at this juncture, might be preferable to a partial sale- depends of course how much is offered.

So why hasn't the price risen ?