Member Info for Culpepper

Well 2 of us like it Mark. New material too.

Mjph
On the contrary, simple is best - Occams Razor sort of thing.
Newcrest may have had their money’s worth out of Telfer plant when the mine is exhausted - 2025? Were it not for H, their shareholders may have been thinking in terms of mothballing/decommissioning costs.

I don’t know that answer, but they will see no less opportunity pro-rata for return on their 70% than we do in respect of Ggp’s 30%, and in my view they will promote the relatively near term cash inflow opportunity on production of metals, because that’s what it’s all about.
And Telfer has to be taken into account, as part of the math, keeping it earning, whilst awaiting the possibility of other finds needing processing.
As somebody said yesterday, it’s all in the numbers, from whatever perspective.

The cart is, anyway, before the horse. A ‘good’ deal for a buyer should be accretive in time. But one needs to know what it is and buy at the right price.
I’ve done on that now, like manipulation/conspiracy.

Let me be plain. I am not against dilution. Nor leveraging debt ( all being well, we shall soon take a fair bit on from the banks) I anticipate more at some stage. It is natural if a company wishes to grow, and if all goes well, as it should, it should be accretive.
It is the sheer scale of that hoped for by Jerry Spaniel that I have just taken against.

You plainly have it around your neck.
Dilution is dilutive.
Assets can be accretive, particularly over time.
Mr. Day and the board will do the best they can.
Individual investors have different time scales.
Ggp is a £400m mkt cap company with no income.
I cannot agree what I think are your dreams.
I have no wish for you to agree my thoughts.

There is no 'not really about it. Either dilution occurs or it does not.
I presume most posting have been in a share where dilution occurs to enable asset purchase. It is by no means unusual.
You talk to people as though they have no understanding. You make a mistake.
You speak if I have your posts correct, of Ggp multiplying the company several times by debt/equity, at the top end.
I consider that both improbable, and likely impossible for Ggp on existing assets and market cap.
There are possibly other ways of the Ggp assets, and the other 70% of Havieron together with Telfer, being put to use advantageously by other means according to opportunity and negotiation. Many expressed on here. We're all waiting to see what, if anything changes. It will likely first appear in a 7am RNS.

The issue of additional shares reducing existing ownership positions, regardless of consequences arising from issuance..

Glad you like it. Pretty good, eh?
Just bringing us back to where we are, before you take us to world dominance via debt and dilution.

Particularly, what one or two of us commented on at the time.
“In his role as Chief Operating Officer, Mr Tyrrell will lead Greatland's technical team and oversee the transition of Havieron from development to production including the integration of Havieron into the Telfer processing plant.”

I thought something might be up when the new appointments made, along the lines of assuming responsibility for development, being in excess of what is required for existing purposes.

It’s human nature I suppose, but moods change according to the music. A while ago it was all about being fully funded to production, no need to raise cash except maybe for something immediately accretive, asx going to be a compliance listing, when will we get a MRE, and so on.
Newmont bids for Newcrest, and now look at the discussion we’re party to.
Interesting though.

TT. Just looking at what needs sorting, perhaps amending, on FS, before commitment to anything else, on time sequence as existing.

I think you miss the point. It is possible to support a project, invest in it, and buy it through negotiation. That is not remotely hostile.

Dip. Why do you regard Wyloo as possibly going hostile? They’re supporters of the Ggp project. In the event they want something that Ggp has, they will negotiate.

Getting back to more mundane and necessary matters, and I have almost no doubt about the outcome so far as DTM is concerned and I don’t know where they are with it, but they’ve yet to publish the feasibility study, including those parts of relevance to the bankers, which will confirm the existing debt proposal.

MB 1965. IF it came about, it would all be down to valuation, dependent on Telfer circumstances too. We’re light on the former, though Ggp and Ncm will be much less so.

I, like many, can see both sides. I’m only interested in my own cash, when it comes down to it.

I was referring to parties negotiating, not us lot!
What also is relevant, is what may be in the JV re Telfer processing, as planned at the outset.
Have a good day.
Cheers.

Many on here tend to see these things in confrontational terms. I don’t. Generally they’re not. It’s done by businessmen, corporate types.
If it suits the projects, suits the purse in the fullness of time, private equity will find a way.