Member Info for Culpepper

Could do with a buy from some of that lot once sworn in.

Well, at a lowly level it hasn’t stopped Wyloo investing at 9p, and board members hoping to buy new shares @11.9p, has it?

I hope so. It all depends on buying interest, doesn’t it? And I honestly don’t see 0.5% or whatever short as the major component, though when I dissented from the shorting explanationit was put to me that on Ggp what’s happening is that they’re buying, selling, buying, selling to keep the lid on the sp. I don’t fully subscribe to that.
Whatever, I think the sp will more likely rise on buying pressure, as opposed to any short closing.

Once you accept, as I do, that sufficient buying raises the price, and the reverse,then the short argument tends to disappear in my opinion.

Chat boards are not necessarily representative of the wider investing community, are they? It’s a goldfish bowl. Tend to attract extremes both ways amongst the rest. Sometimes not the sort of views/way of expressing them one might experience in real life.
Nevertheless I find them useful to read, particularly posts by naysayers, who can be relied upon to fish around with a view to presenting the very worst of scenarios in the time available to them.
And then it’s a question of does it hold water, and if it does, how much?

People view things in different ways. It’s why there’s a meeting and a vote, isn’t it? In this case, on specific funding to mine, one off, and then the general authorities renewable 12 monthly.
On your circumstance, and you won’t be alone, I believe the authorities are intended as means to more readily improve shareholders prospects than diminish them.

Thankyou for posting. I just update really, keep it going. Nothing strenuous.
I think you could buy a lot of stuff now, and wait for the how long off improvement in conditions.
Wickes one of them now, but also in my view has since spin off had more going for it than the UK competition, and getting better, and well placed in harder times as against retail in general.

JB

My post continued, “the reverse prior to cash coming in from production. “
However, I think you are mainly concerned with Resolution3, and the sum involved. They say as comment, which I take as an honest appraisal

“Whilst the Directors have no present intention of exercising this authority, the authority gives the Directors flexibility to issue shares where they believe it is in the best interests of the Company to do so.”

Subsequently, the conversation went to the ‘next deal’. I do not know what that may be. I did not mention licences. You believe they intend to acquire another already or near term revenue generating asset. That may or may not be the case. Were that to be so, I would be content as others have expressed provided it is accretive.

I have not done and would not argue your point on 14 days for a meeting. Yet there is an unexplained reason for that renewable authority, I trust, literally, in the best interests of shareholders. You are plainly suspicious of the board, either because of a belief they may be devious at shareholder expense, or inept. I do not take that view. Though I accept yours.

You will object. I shall not.

I shall vote for all resolutions, on the basis directors have a duty to act in the best interests of shareholders. I expect them to do that for me and others, and would not wish to tie their hands in matters of which I (and maybe competitive parties) cannot be expected to be given prior knowledge.

I can’t guess at the nature of the potential next deal. I don’t know why acquisitions should be in the mix. Perhaps another Joint Venture. What I mean is, what are they likely to want to spend on? Outgoings, not catered for by existing cash.
I honestly don’t know, though we can all guess at something.

Wyloo’s overall investment works out at 9p per share. And Greatland now has a strategic partner, focused on mine development, who see Havieron as a low cost gold/copper operation.

The 220 m dollar debt bank commitment is at 3.50% p.a. margin plus Australian benchmark reducing to a margin of 3.25% p.a. post project completion with early repayment flexibility. It is said to be highly competitive.

And that comes into play when paying off Newcrest - the first bank drawdown will pay them off and enables interest to be reduced early from benchmark plus 8.00% down to benchmark plus 3.50%

I do not see anything wrong with that. So far, so good. Fully funded. What everybody wanted. There will be costs associated with the funding arrangements.

There is no suggestion of future dilution. If anything, the reverse prior to cash coming in from production. But it has to be accepted there never is, is there, in advance. It will depend to a large extent on what opportunities present themselves, and how the company chooses to go about it.

 

Don’t think anybody has done that.
Just the Chairman.
“The Board believes that the resolutions to be put to the General Meeting are in the best interests of the Company and shareholders as a whole and, accordingly, recommends that shareholders vote in favour of the resolutions as the Board intend to do in respect of their own beneficial holdings of Ordinary Shares which represent 0.31 per cent of the Company's issued ordinary share capital at the date of this document.”

I get your thrust. Wouldn’t want to get involved in that. This board tying itself in knots anyway. Some I suppose to be fair. The awkward squad.
Generally dissent from proposals comes from institutions, who wade in when they see an imbalance in the offing. One good reason for having them. Many others, obviously. Other than that, sometimes there’s a revolt over board pay or bonuses.
Mostly, proposals have been aired with any major shareholder beforehand, if likely to be contentious.
I don’t think any of these resolutions are contentious in real life. Once you work them out. Most are content to trust the management on it. But you can vote how you want.

On voting, beyond being passed the only thing the voting may show is the lethargy of pi’s when it comes to exercising their rights.

Should have said will have voting clout. But it’s by the by. I want to get this meeting done. Settled. Not argued about. And move on from there.

Now, will a ‘cheeky bid’ be recommended? At whatever stage? And as I said before, it’s only Wyloo who have any voting clout, and not enough without garnering a lot of support. If Ncm were buying big amounts, we’d know by now.
But I do agree with whoever said it would be preferable to get a few institutions invested, voting power, and to give greater scrutiny as more independent investors - thereby protecting pi’s from probably unlikely excesses.

It’s been perfectly well-explained.
‘This financing facility is a key component of Greatland's funding strategy to maximise available debt funding with banks before the Feasibility Study and repay the Newcrest facility to maximise shareholder value.
The debt funding requires a total equity contribution of £60m as a pre-condition to full draw down. The August 2022 equity raising together with the Wyloo Placement announced today, fully satisfies the equity requirement of the proposed financing.’

There will be those who ‘don’t like it’. There you go. Well, vote against it if you want. No good banging on.

And if you don’t like the other resolutions, no faith in the CEO and board, don’t trust them to get on with it, well, vote against them too.

Yes. Well. So we’re waiting for the dark forces to show their hand and buy a load? Maybe there’ll be a holdings RNS.

Just looked back. Should have before. They have £2 on it.

So on a purely basic PE valuation, strictly against Kingfisher, I think that means today Wickes should be approaching £2. And/or Kingfisher very overvalued, Wickes undervalued.
Just what they’re saying, of course. Something like that.
I’m quite bemused by the whole thing just now.

And the new directors might surprise you and buy some. Then they’ll be wonderful, glad to have them on board. And all that.