Member Info for Culpepper

Ongoing usage for processing. An agreement to that effect between JV partners, or potentially being unable to process ore as part of the fundamental plan as agreed.

PS I am a little disappointed that the original JV is on my reading of what has been said, somwhat lacking from a Ggp perspective. I would have expected Telfer to have been wrapped up in it.

It is plain, that either Mr. Day got the wrong end of the stick, or Newcrest did not do as he was perhaps led to believe or assumed they would.

It is equally plain that nobody on here, or an individual reporter can know what Newmont will do with their 70% and Telfer. They have yet to vote, appoint a board, and consider how best to optimise their portfolio. I assume the prospect of decommissioning and reclamation costs were considered as part of Newmont’s bid.

We do know, that Mr. Day is quoted in a report as saying Ggp will bid for Newmont’s holding in H should it come to market. ( I presume that could be a %age, if a further partnership is formed )

Nothing is fixed, and won’t be until Newmont are in a position to determine their own way ahead. They may want to keep the lot ( and more? ) That indecision on paper seems reflected in the change of wording from ‘intended’ to use Telfer for Havieron ore, to ‘may’.

I’ll write to North Pole. Good luck to you.

Not me. Speedy on his list though. Bag full of Brits.

You’re way ahead of me! Not thought what I’m doing for Christmas yet.

I should think old Mr. Day got a migraine on that. Darkened room for him.

The work programmes required to incorporate these drill results into an updated Havieron MRE are in progress, and Greatland expects an updated Havieron MRE to be completed in the December 2023 quarter.

I believe Newmont buys the JV as stands, with accompanying conditions

And then are free to make their choices.

It’s all fullness of time, isn’t it.

I really am ‘only’ thinking of getting to commercial production and cash flow. Rest is obliged to fall into place.

Can’t see anybody not monetising an asset, one way or the other.

I knew what you meant, of course. Ggp just has to wait until somebody else does something.

In the meantime, which might be ‘forever’, nothing changes in-house planning.

Dip. Some kept on about this ‘game of chess.’ Steely eyed stuff. Now a ‘prawn on the cheeseboard.’ 🤪

Newmont’s move…….

Havieron is on track, other exploration is advancing.

In relation to ‘thieves’ I remain of the view it will likely be the corporate moves that will make a difference to pi’s, if they happen, and as individuals welcome them or not.

CEO’s will always have a greater interest in funding a company’s activities, than appeasing PI’s.

On the other hand , such is the vast number of private UK investors , that if the CEO wished to generate cheap shares for the institutions , particularly those in Australia , then he would not take actions to encourage the retention of shares by UK holders.

——————-

Whilst taking on board your relevant views, I do not understand that paragraph.

Getting cash into Ggp, and trading on the secondary market, are vastly different propositions.

My understanding is the application process can begin, and be varied/amended as circumstances change in advance of a flexible listing date.

Timing of ASX listing seems to me to be relevant to the overall process in two ways.

Prospective investors in the new Australian market would expect to see a ‘to date’ summary in the prospectus or memorandum information document.

Investors would expect the company to comment on existing funding, and the extent to which it fulfils foreseen requirements. It will be necessary to bring information, such as has been waited on, to bear.

Secondly, IF additional funding is seen as being required, for a specific purpose, or to maintain a strong balance sheet whilst maintaining, or accelerating business as usual, the new listing provides the ideal opportunity to take advantage of any pent-up demand from institutional investors, on the day it takes effect.

Enjoy yourself.

Shorting and trading are different operations.

Having read your post, am I right in my conclusion you actually characterise the behaviour you describe as trading, rather than shorting?