The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Always struck me, as a fellow engineer, to be a good egg. I'm sure he knows enough about J Curve's machinations to be of great help to the cause, though I wouldn't be surprised if there is an NDA lurking somewhere!
ALB1
A vote was taken. Surely the result must be declared, irrespective of any further negociations? There cannot be a genuine reason for delay.
GERTFROBE/ YORKSHIREBRED,
I don't usually get involved in squabbles but, as the person who first posted on the matter of the tunnel spec., the following may assist.
I am a Civil Engineer, have been since 1972. I have two degrees in the subject and have been a Senior Engineer/Team Leader since then and more latterly a University Lecturer for 20 years.
I do know something about construction.
Matt,
Presumably you will go to "other banks" to buy your single certificated share. Make sure you get the certificate number. You will need it to vote.
Liam,
My pecking typing is so slow it would take all next week to engage in a "conversation". Telephone is much the better way.
The demand by JPM that the spec. for the tunnel should be increased (costing $600 million more) was, in my view, totally unnecessary and was made to make the raising of capital more difficult and therefore more likely to fail. That it was not necessary is evidenced by the recent revised Stage 2 proposals for a totally unlined tunnel section from Woodsmith shaft towards Wilton.
All part of the "grand plan".
Can I first record my respect and best wishes for the activities of this group. They have acheived a much in a very short time and I am full of admiration. We NO voters must all do whatever we can to help by spreading the word and asking others to take their survey (www.FundSirius.com).
I have just read details of the Bond Scheme that they suggest and it does look very sensible. A few thoughts come to mind;
1. Shareholders could sell a proportion of their holding to finance purchase of bonds.
2. This way the monies released would go directly to the Sirius pot rather than getting lost in the market.
3. If this results in a Capital Loss, then this can be set against Capital Gains elsewhere, even in future years.
4. Some dilution would occur but we are prepared for that.
5. Returns on the bonds are delayed but this only equates to the same thing as shareholders being prepared to wait for returns on their shares.
6. The compounded interest on the bonds is much better than can be obtained elsewhere.
Hope the present surge in sentiment is maintained.
ffc, I'm sure we are on the same page but your report of HL advice is disturbing. I was very careful to repeat back each part of my discussion on an "are you saying that?" basis and these were the answers I received. I would add that Dan, who took my call, broke off several times to consult elsewhere.
ffc and LTV will you please STOP giving out partial and therefore incorrect information on this subject. Please read KOH of 21:27, reproduced below;
Great post by cityslicker1000. Please read:
"I am greatly heartened to see the strength and volume for a NO vote being expressed by PIs on this BB. I feel strongly too and have consequently contacted HL, my nominee, to investigate how I can maximise the value of my vote.
I have previously posted regarding the vulnerability of SXX to a loss at the Court Meeting at 11:00. Remember, one shareholder, one vote. This means that your individual vote at the meeting, even if you only hold a very few shares, counts as much as that of J curve, Jupiter, Polygon, etc., despite them holding their millions of shares. Remember also that it is a 50% vote by number of shareholders voting and there are many, many more of us than there are of them.
My call to HL was very instructive and they responded to my questions (through a very helpful young man called Dan) as follows;
1. If you do not take any action to acquire an individual vote for yourself at this meeting you will be included, along with several thousand others, in the single vote that they can register.
2. If you make a request to them, they will provide you with a letter that will allow you to vote as an individual in this meeting. Your vote is thus very powerful.
3. If you do not wish to attend the meeting, they will provide a Proxy to vote on your behalf.
4. If you wish to vote by proxy you will need to give them at least 5 days notice to make the necessary arrangements.
I was blown away when considering the opportunity that this proxy option offered. Thousands of voters who might have lost their influence can be enfranchised."
Your vote MATTERS. Please follow the instructions above. The most important thing to remember is that the vote at the Court Meeting is where SXX is very, very, very vulnerable to a NO vote. Remember, one share holder, one vote. To do this, PIs with nominee accounts (HL, Barclays, Halifax, etc.) must firstly contact their account holder and request a letter giving them power to VOTE AS AN INDIVIDUAL. Remember, the vote is by a head count of voters, irrespective of the number of votes held by the voter. if enough PIs are able to vote as an individual at this meeting they will be able to win a 50/50 contest. Your e.g. single share holder vote is as important as e.g. Fraser's, Polygon's or Jupiter's. ONE VOTE. Please make sure you vote as INDIVIDUAL at the COURT MEETING.
From the SIRIUS MINERALS - PUBLICATION OF SCHEME DOCUMENT:
Latest time for lodging Forms of Proxy for the:
Court Meeting (BLUE Form of Proxy) 11.00 a.m. on 28 February 2020(1)
General Meeting (WHITE Form of Proxy) 11.15 a.m. on 28 February 2020(2)
Voting Record Time for the Court Meeting and the
General Meeting
6.30 p.m. on 28 February 2020(3)
Court Meeting 11.00 a.m. on 3 March 2020
General Meeting 11.15 a.m.(4) on 3 March 2020
KOH
mikea1boy
Please read 21:27 by KOH and follow procedure.
Read KOH's excellent post of 21:27 carefully then ring whoever holds your shares and follow the procedures described in the post.
It does occur to me that, given the very large numbers I see being quoted on the BB, the venue will not accommodate the number of PIs intending to attend in person. Securing a proxy for your vote(s) would ensure it would be registered even if you cannot gain entry.
KOH
Well done. I really don't mind you cutting and pasting from my posts if it mobilises votes that might otherwise not have been used. You have far more influence than me.
I would emphasise that the message only relates to my call to HL, I don't know what services other nominees offer. PIs should check for themselves. I would point out that you need to act in the next day or so, given the tight time line.
Perhaps KOH, you can see if you can use your contacts to arrange proxies for non-attenders who cannot make arrangements with their nominees.
Gertfrobe,
Perhaps the prospect of a NO vote will stimulate him to "get out there" and do something about it. I would, if only to relieve myself of the STENCH that must exist where he is.
Herman 1,
I can assure you that the single name of the nominee is the only name that appears on the share register in respect of the number of the shares they hold for all of it’s customers. As such they, like those I mention in my earlier post, get a single vote. That is why SXX have, in panic, asked all shareholders to ensure they vote, “especially in respect of the Court Meeting”.
Holders such as yourself were not the target of my post. I was aiming at those who could not get to the meeting so that they could make their voice heard.
I am greatly heartened to see the strength and volume for a NO vote being expressed by PIs on this BB. I feel strongly too and have consequently contacted HL, my nominee, to investigate how I can maximise the value of my vote.
I have previously posted regarding the vulnerability of SXX to a loss at the Court Meeting at 11:00. Remember, one shareholder, one vote. This means that your individual vote at the meeting, even if you only hold a very few shares, counts as much as that of J curve, Jupiter, Polygon, etc., despite them holding their millions of shares. Remember also that it is a 50% vote by number of shareholders voting and there are many, many more of us than there are of them.
My call to HL was very instructive and they responded to my questions (through a very helpful young man called Dan) as follows;
1. If you do not take any action to acquire an individual vote for yourself at this meeting you will be included, along with several thousand others, in the single vote that they can register.
2. If you make a request to them, they will provide you with a letter that will allow you to vote as an individual in this meeting. Your vote is thus very powerful.
3. If you do not wish to attend the meeting, they will provide a Proxy to vote on your behalf.
4. If you wish to vote by proxy you will need to give them at least 5 days notice to make the necessary arrangements.
I was blown away when considering the opportunity that this proxy option offered. Thousands of voters who might have lost their influence can be enfranchised.
Can some other HL customer phone them to absolutely confirm the above and to fill-in on any points that I may have missed?
Franalex,
Do you think AA would be the only party trying to buy from the Administrator. No, there would be some kind of competition.
At least Bukky is correct on one thing (today 9:25), the vote at the Court Meeting is where SXX is very, very, very vulnerable to a NO vote. Will someone with expertise in financial matters please read my post at Sunday 20:57 and respond.
I believe that if enough PIs are able to vote as an individual at this meeting they will be able to win a 50/50 contest. To do this, PIs with nominee accounts (HL, Barclays, Halifax, etc.) must firstly contact their account holder and request a letter giving them power to vote as an individual. Remember, the vote is by a head count of voters, irrespective of the number of votes held by the voter.
Can someone please advise what the PI should then do with the letter from their nominee in order to have their vote registered and be counted at the meeting? Can this be done without having to attend the London meeting?
Thanks in anticipation.
Can someone Explain the purpose of this meeting;
1. What Motion will be up for discussion?
2. What amendment could be put?
3. What happens if an amended motion is carried?
4. What effect might acceptance of 3 above have on the later General Meeting?
5. Must a proposal of some kind emerge from the Court Meeting?
6. Can you confirm that every voting shareholder (PI, II, Nominee Shareholder, etc,) gets a single vote no matter how many shares he/she/they hold?
7. Must a proposal gain >50% of single votes cast to pass?
Thanks in anticipation.
I have been a holder since well before Planning Permission and have added since to accumulate a holding exceeding that of the majority of the members of the BOD.
I am of the opinion that we are where we are, not due to unfortunate events, but due to manipulation. I am a Civil Engineer and was therefore more than surprised that, despite using experienced consultants and internationally recognised contractors, it was demanded that we changed the tunnel specification, requiring an extra $600 million to be raised. The present problems flowed from our agreement to do this. That this was not necessary is amply demonstrated by the inferior, yet still efficatious, methodology and reduced cost of the revised planned drive from the the shaft towards Wilton. Makes you think don't it!
I am also drawn to speculate what would happen if it became known that the AA offer would be voted down. Fraser would lose £6m in shares and a reported £1m in future salary. I should think this would be sufficient stimulus to prompt him into fruitful activity.