Member Info for Culpepper

I read your detailed view.
Loads of words coming down to valuation and sensible practice, and Ggp would have offered more, I think.
And if you’re feeling prickly, take it out on the cat, or something.

I don’t think Mr. Day did anything remarkable over the 5% by the way. Seems to me Newcrest decided not to pick it up. And nobody quite knows why.

If anything the old share price was the joke, not the company, And not Mr. Day.
The company, Havieron aspect, is in transition. And has a much enhanced board to reflect that.

I thought that the schedule for first ore continues to be reviewed and will be updated with the release of the Feasibility Study.
Apologies if that is no longer the case.

Older one.

“While the study remains in progress, it will now be extended beyond the December 2022 quarter to allow further time to maximise value and de-risk the project.”

The aim is to prevent that as you know. If there were no risks, there would be no repeated mention of de-risking the project.

There will be greater clarity of mind when the company is able to include something going to these lines.
THE DEFINITIVE FEASIBILITY STUDY (DFS)
The question ‘To mine or not to mine?’ is resolved at this stage.

By now all processing parameters have been through detailed and accurate metallurgical test-work has occurred.

While inevitably some will be assumed, these are usually realistic because they are dependant on all mining, processing and other considerations taken at and before this point.

As an example, Arafura Resources’ (ASX: ARU) Definitive Feasibility Study for its Nolans project in the Northern Territory forecast average annual production figures of 4,356 tonnes of Neodymium-Praseodymium oxide and and 135,808 tonnes of merchant grade phosphoric acid.

The mine’s life will be 23 years and average annual pre-tax earnings at A$377 million EBITDA, although the project would require just over $1 billion in capital and up to 650 employees at the peak construction phase.

The company used the study’s release to proclaim to investors, “the Project is financially and technically robust to support a long life operation”.

There’s a whole load of stuff that they will be considering and perhaps not spelled out in RNS.
I was glancing through this one earlier, just in general.
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/metals-and-mining/our-insights/optimizing-mining-feasibility-studies-the-100-billion-opportunity

However anybody else looks at it, I have long been convinced that there are far bigger considerations to mull over, corporate or otherwise, than the share price on a particular day.

Don’t forget that funding is subject to feasibility study criteria. That will mean presenting the best full documentation to the banks on future costs and all the rest of it, perhaps with a changed mining plan arising from advancing knowledge. So they have to get it right.

Yes. The decline, for example, is an important feature, and if done with outlook in mind will optimise results. Progress is good, but as part of the overall project it goes to timing, and future plans. So sat at home, a metre or two a day more or less?
On timing and the interview, appears as earlier suggested on here that with good reason, further anticipated reporting may be subject to delay on pi expectations.

It’s counter-intuitive for me, but I rather hope that prospective investors are harbouring some doubts about the future, and that these will be dispelled with publication of further more pertinent information.

I expect it’ll work back up to where the market previously put it. It may even go on a little.

People trade, buy and hold, in anticipation of what an RNS may do for a share price. Nothing got started. They sell.

It’s more stock in the ground, as anticipated. That has not historically excited investors, and no reason to assume this would either. It goes to life of mine, so much every year, year on year, with earnings varying according to efficiency and price of metals. Like a factory with raw materials in for years ahead.
If a bidder turned up, with no concern about a future share price, he would be looking at how many years it would take to get his money back and get into profit. That’s quite a long term thing.
I look at it in the same way, and believe that capital appreciation will only come with positive decisions around mining, and that later activity, when clarification occurs. So I look to future, practical considerations being addressed around the DTM, what flows therefrom, including provision of funding, as they progress to mining.
The potential will continue to exist for a recommended bid which may thwart mining pi’s, but there’s no reason to assume that is on the cards at the moment. And if that comes, well, it’ll have to be at a price acceptable to Ggp and cohort.

Don’t be daft. You can’t blame first modern if the share price doesn’t go up.

Some sort of threat coming to an end for Ggp and shareholders?
If so, thank goodness. Let us know when it’s all over, and you’ll be permitted to hold for multi-years. No corporate shenanigans for us.

For what it’s worth. Not much you’ll say. I spoke to a CFO a while ago on another matter. The subject came up. He told me that they self-regulate as a matter of judgment, outside of closed periods in connection with reporting, and on that basis had been effectively locked out for much of the year. Just one company view.

https://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/news/2022/09/22/looking-behind-directors-share-deals/

ISA?