Member Info for Daisan

More bought (and judging by today's trades I would say more have been taken). I know that AIM investors are not exactly known for their patience but honestly, if you know a group want to buy a certain number of shares within a specific time frame, is it not worthwhile holding on for a while rather than making it easy for them?

Bought by the concert party on Friday. 5.2m left according to the RNS. 20.5p highest price paid (so no higher than the previous highest). The round price sellers are making this a bit too easy for Labro again.

You may end up disappointed with that expectation MrCarlos. There has been quite a bit of dilution since then and you may want to set your targets a little lower as a result. Time may be on PIs side but patience is not. I suspect our Chairman's patience is orders of magnitude greater than the average AIM investor. I still expect a takeover once we get to April but this is by no means guaranteed. I would expect 30p to be a reasonable target and I would also expect it to be accepted.

ProTr.Amr.H, Yes, future price rises may help you out with that as well but I suggest that you might want to cut back expenditure as well. :-) You might want to research a bit further. Debt was $35.1m at last report and has decreased substantially during 2016. It is currently very manageable even with a temporarily impacted production profile. However, should production continue to deteriorate, the debt will once again reassert itself as an issue.

I meant to finish that last post with 'this should be a good investment in the future'.

Copper production is unlikely to have increased at a rate to offset the reduction in gold production. In addition, there was a reduction in mined material in the last quarter which is likely to impact copper as well as gold production. This is still a gold producer with copper and silver credits currently so gold production is by far and away the most important aspect here. The connection to the grid is indeed a significant development over the last few months and should reduce the AISC as you say. This should soften the financial blow of any production shortfall. Assuming they can sort out the production issues (and I suspect it will be a couple of quarters until we know for sure as Q1, apart from being a poor quarter historically, looks like it will just confirm the reducing profile).

zanthrus, 'Great minds think alike' or 'fools never differ'? You are too kind! I would point out that I tend to be a fundamentals investor in a sentiment driven market. This means I quite frequently get my timing wrong! It is also indeed possible that AAZ turn their production profile around quickly and resume the positive news flow. With a supportive gold price that would create a very positive share price environment I am sure and I would look to be back in it at that point. I am aware of AAZ's desire to increase the copper production but copper is less interesting to me (I say 'less' but I still have exposure to copper elsewhere). I would hate to think that the gold production here is suffering as a result of a push for copper. I have no reason to believe that given the evidence and can't see why it should be the case. But I am yet to understand the reason for the production shortfall and until I do I would be reticent about reinvesting. It is all well and good saying that the shortfall in Q4 was due to lower grade but the key is to understand why this is the case so that you can do something about it. I rate the team at AAZ so suspect that they are on top of this but I would like the evidence to confirm this before reinvesting. I would also point out that AAZ is what I consider to be one of my 'disappointment' shares. Not because it has disappointed but rather that my choices in the past have been not quite right. I hesitated to invest at 4p as it looked like the gold price could take another dip so ended up buying at 6p (I think). I also bought less than I should have with more being invested in SHG which I consider to be a somewhat better quality producer with more short term possibilities for increasing production (if with the short/medium term potential for disappointment owing to their movement underground). On that basis I could be completely wrong with my timing here. Good luck to holders and I will look to get back in when the production looks like it is becoming more stable.

I will start with a confession - I have sold my holding here. I think that this is a very fair board so I will be honest about my reasons (I confess I wasn't completely transparent when I sold MARL, which is involved in one of the best deposits in the world, I consider fully valued, as I don't feel as comfortable on that board). I am still very bullish on gold long term and still have significant exposure to gold miners so the reasons are mainly specific to AAZ. Firstly, whilst I am bullish on gold in the long term I still think that there is a chance, albeit a decreasing one, of a pullback in the price in the short-medium term. I consider this to be less than evens but even so there is a chance. We have seen in the recent wobble in the gold price that AAZ is susceptible should this take place. This is not in itself sufficient reason for me to sell. Secondly, and most importantly to me, the production profile is falling. This is despite the July/August activities to get things back on track. Q2, Q3 and Q4 saw progressively lower production numbers whereas in 2015 they were more robust. Q3 and Q4 is where we saw the issue as Q2 was also robust. In Q4 there was a reduction in grade which I always hate to see in gold miners. Grade and recovery are essential components that are somewhat difficult to overcome whereas if the reason for a shortfall is tonnage you can usually sort that out operationally. It would appear that tonnage was down as well in Q4. Whilst January is a bad month anyway for AAZ due to the weather, this month's production figures confirm that trend (for comparison, January 2016's figures were 135.5kg (4356oz) and the ultimate production of dore for the quarter was 13383 with 1412 overall). At that rate they are going to struggle to beat 11k oz which would be exceptionally disappointing. Q3, Q4 and the start of Q1 suggest that this is an ongoing problem that has not yet been resolved but it is unclear to me what that problem is. Note that I sold out before seeing these figures. Reaction to the Q1 numbers also tends to be negative but I suspect this year that will depend on the gold price - many are looking for it to soar. Thirdly, whilst the geopolitics don't particularly concern me when the production is robust, if it falls then I am somewhat more concerned. This was my least significant consideration. AAZ has made great progress over the last 12 months with exploration and connectivity to the grid which should provide for a better future and I am optimistic ultimately. However, for the reasons stated, particularly short/medium term production numbers. If and when progress seems to be being made as regards production numbers, I will look to buy back in. As a final point, I would like to continue contributing despite the fact that I no longer hold. I will not 'de-ramp' as is the popular accusation!

The key amounts I believe are 75% and 90%. At 90% it would become unconditional I believe and we would be forced to sell our shares. In reality I would expect what you indicate would come to pass i.e. any offer recommended by the board would just sail through unopposed.

So we've gone above 20p buy price for Labro and the share price held up well despite the round number profit taking. This does bode well in my opinion and the pressure on the share price is likely to remain for some time yet. Assuming the profit takers sell less than 5m shares we should see further movement forwards. More convinced than ever that this will be taken over. As such, I thought I would have a look at the takeover details as described in regulation 19 of the articles of association (CGH is not subject to the takeover code). It is clear that there is some discretion by the BoDs but the article principally follows the takeover code. Over 50% would give Labro a great deal of power here but they couldn't force a takeover at that point. I think it likely that they will seek to go over 50% and thereby make an offer for the whole company. The articles indicate that they conform to the takeover code in terms of price, namely that they must offer the maximum paid over the previous 12 months before the commencement of the takeover. Interesting times still ahead and I see no reason why the upward pressure on the share price should not continue.

Exercise of those warrants would be fantastic in every way! I should think that the additional £8m would be very useful indeed. Given the performance here over the last year it is not out of the question and the business is solid. However, I suspect that 40p by end of November may be a little too much.

Lennie, Are you holding here? I seem to recall you bought right at the bottom (4-5p ish) and then sold into the rise last summer. Is that the case or am I mis-remembering? Perhaps we are due another strange rise like last summer.

Pablo2, I didn't realise you were here (or did I and had forgotten?). I don't visit very often as, despite the assets here being way above the market cap., it is difficult to see how these assets are going to be utilised for the benefit of shareholders. Unfortunately I think that they are going to miss a golden opportunity. They have the financial muscle to buy a decent (gold) asset and progress it, unlike many on AIM. If you look at OSU (now only quoted on TSXV), they have sold their asset and reached an agreement with another gold asset with 2m oz gold that needs proving up/BFS, etc. As they have cash, they will not need to dilute to do it so it would appear to be a great buy at this level. OVG could be even better as they have twice the liquid assets. Unfortunately, there is no particular sign that they are going to do anything with it currently. If they do, this could go up in multiples overnight. But you may well have your cash in here for years waiting. Still, the dividends mean that they do not need to raise money or realise assets to pay themselves. You can't help thinking that it is a bit too easy for the principles currently though. My recommendation to the board - find an asset and start putting the not inconsiderable current assets to good use.

A little disappointing? It was terrible. Apart from production down across the board, grades and recoveries were also down which is somewhat concerning. That said, it is likely that commodity prices will be more supportive this month and if they can get the data back up this will appear to be a blip. Their gold assets remain what they are - considerable - so this should underpin the value of the company (provided commodities do remain supportive that is).

Ah interesting! Which is where the 15p came from. OK, I stand corrected so it is good to see that they are indeed buying above the warrant price. Strange that they should quote the warrant exercise price in USD on one of their holdings notices. Usually you like these things to be accurate.

OLI12, I confess I invest for a bit of fun rather than earth shattering wealth! I am not exactly the world's biggest spender so I am not quite sure what I would do with huge wealth other than feel guilty that I have it when others don't. So whether this collapses would not be the end of the world to me. I just find the whole process fascinating - sometimes frustrating but always interesting. On the contrary, I think that there are very good reasons for taking this over. They would not have to be listed, conform to regulatory standards and involve other stakeholders If you have ever run a business with other shareholders it can be a painful process even if they are in the minority. I think a person like our Chairman would really rather not have to jump through the hoops associated with a listed company. If he believes in the potential of the company as well, a driven man is likely to see the 50% he doesn't own as a lost opportunity. Rich people tend to like to be richer for some unfathomable reason that I haven't yet sussed.

Hi manxdragon, I found the warrant price on a holdings notice from 7th November last year (the one at 9:15). It states that the exercise price is $0.234 for 21,367,521 warrants. The director shareholding ones we see don't seem to contain the information.

We haven't had confirmation that they have paid over the warrant price yet. It is $0.234 which is about 18.7p.

Very interesting indeed. They have upped their rate. I can't recall the last time they bought 400k shares in a day. Highest price paid was 15.75 (the highest so far). You have to assume, given the volume and price pressure, that they have kept it up over the last couple of days so I expect further news items to confirm. They could not have bought today for much less than 17p. I think if this RNS, confirming new high buying prices, had been released during the session this would have put even more pressure on the price so would not be surprised if we see, at least initially, further pressure first off tomorrow. Very interesting times indeed.

Well, in the early days of Labro's buying they just mopped up the disgruntled investors who just wanted to get out and saw the opportunity to dump as a result of any interest. This included an institution who handed over their shares to Labro for a pittance. There then came the period of a gradual rise as Labro's demand started to outstrip the supply. However, since the last news release, which was obviously interpreted as CGH finally getting their act together and people other than the CEO taking control, we have had the double influence of Labro and PI buying which has accelerated the increase. But I wouldn't read too much into this. You see strange movements in AIM all the time - long periods of stasis or drift followed by intense periods of sharp rises and falls. This is relatively innocuous compared to some.