Member Info for Davde

Rastuss thanks for this update, Uncle Joe is certainly upping the pressure! I am sure Jabba will be under pressure from other miners in region also. Still think Labour court needs to rule ASAP! We can expect an announcement shortly from Jabba, suspect it will up the stakes further maybe threatening to close unprofitable gold mines/shafts sooner rather than later should strikes continue as SBGL cannot keep incurring losses. Cannot see Jabba rolling over we will see! Next 48 hours will be interesting.

Rastuss Cyril would be best placed to put pressure on labour court who hopefully will find in SBGL favour. That being the case extending strikes would be unprotected and less likely to spread. Jabba could offer some olive branch to Joe as previously mentioned if Joe continues on the path of inciting unprotected strikes he should be arrested. Yes it may make a martyr of him in a minorities eyes but Cyril needs to take control of ANC and show he is a powerful leader otherwise he will have a bloodbath on his hands! From what I can gather there is not a lot of public support for miners in SA people appreciate it is a difficult job but pay and conditions have improved over the recent years and the miners are well off compared to many others in SA. The people want a better economy the fruits of which benefit all that requires investment and an end to corruption
Rant of day over!

Rastuss it is possible SBGL closes or significantly reduces its gold operations by closing unprofitable mines and LMI also closes as a consequence of prolonged strikes and SBGL bid failure not sure how that increases AMCU membership! Lighting blue touch paper may blow up in Mr M's face its a high stakes game which will be decided one way or other shortly after SA elections I hope.

Sadly this has nothing to do with an extra 250 rand a month or saving jobs, its to support Mr M's political ambitions and the forthcoming election! Hopefully Labour court will rule soon and make these strikes unprotected but suspect it is all going to take time. That being the case I can foresee another extension to backstop date! The prize is still big for SBGL! The new non exec looks impressive, an expert in transformational change, all fits SBGL strategy.

Rastuss thanks for this gives an insight into Mr M's potential motivations that may not be altogether altruistic! If I was Cyril perhaps pushing for more transparency on how a unions membership fees are spent could be useful politically, although could backfire on him if he is not squeaky clean himself. He has declared he wants to eradicate corruption that aim should not only be applicable to government officials and having transparency is the way to do it. Agree christian belief and communist views are not incompatible, but being untruthful is and having seen him being interviewed he came across as evasive when being questioned by reporter also SBGL have called him disingenuous over his view of what happened during pay negotiations! Jabba should consider apppointing employee directors I know it is not the norm but it works for all parties in understanding issues and coming up with workable solutions for all stakeholders it also takes power away from militant unions whose motivations are not always in best interests of the company or its workers but political. SA (and others) needs radical changes to how it does business and it works if everyone had common goals. My trip into fantasy over!'

Rastuss do unions in south Africa publish annual accounts been trying to locate as interested to know how much Mr M earns by comparison to a miner and Jabba? Also a bit confused how a christian (Wikipedia page) can be a communist!

Rastuss balanced view of issues. Hopefully the labour court makes a decision soon in favour of SBGL, this should mitigate strike spreading. SBGL will want to settle without changing current offer, a compromise could be around further enhancing say medical provisions and injury and death benefits. This would fit with SBGL strategy of putting safety first and at the same time allowing AMCU to save face. The AMCU need to maintain their membership in both SBGL and LMI, any long strike in either will damage existing jobs and that is in nobody's interest, particularly AMCU if existing members are drifing to other unions as SBGL purport. If the mining unions really want muscle they should consider merging but that would mean the leadersips giving up some perks and status they enjoy. Sure ordinary miners must wonder at times where there membership fees go at times! My naive rant over!

Rastuss think we maybe talking at cross purposes I was talking about clarification re verification process being made which it seems to have been. Not the completion of the verification process itself! We should hear shortly, hopefully this week that it has been completed, although court may take time to offer decision on results!

Rastuss it was in the SBGL update last week on the news page on their site, attaching links beyond my techy capabilities at present!

Rastuss think they have agreed the membership counting method last weeks update indicated this I think! If the Labour court rules in SBGL favour presumably the extension of the strike to platinum mines would be unprotected? Agree Feb date will not be met and SBGL may have second thoughts should action go ahead but we are not there yet, this saga has some mileage yet! The prize for SBGL is still significant but as pointed out below a prolonged strike at SBGL sites could yet save LMI (maybe).

Rastuss we will need to agree to disagree re the interpretation of the word completion in the refinancing relesse . Hopefully we will hear from labour court re counting membes shortly we will wait and see! Re your last para in particular last sentence agree with you on that one LMI would be bust ( in business rescue) last February when covenants kicked without SBGL bid and will be should it fail.

Rastuss para 2 completion of SBGL refers to the orgional finance deal pre streaming in my view, remember LMI would probably have failed last February without the SBGL offer as covenants would not have been waived. Second completition in para 3 relates to streaming deal ending in year 1. It is very confusing so could be wrong! Without seeing actual contract cannot be certain also terms not clear yes we know split of metals but not quantities or price the 12% return is a minimum! Anyway tomorrow another day and hopefully we see some movement on labour court giving guidance on who is a member of what and crucially when they became a member. I hope SBGL have played with a straight bat as think they could have the upper hand if they have otherwise fear strikes may spread! We will know soon enough.

Rastuss problem is the word completion is used several times but relates to seperate events in my view. This deal was always going to slip in terms of timescales and the LMI streaming deal verified this i.e. removing covenant conditions and allowing SBGL time and the opportunity to review position when takeover takes place in particular security of LMI assets
Time will tell and risks still there!

Rastuss I had trouble with this one myself, my view is it means after year 1 they can settle up this facility for between $50m and $80 m ensuring a 16% return achieved. Thereafter a new facility put in place for balance of loan after year 1 payback and settlement the 50 to 80 mill, minimum return think it was 12%. Think that is what it means but could be wrong its not an easy read!

Rastuss the early repayment $50m -$80m is at the end of year 1 of the streaming deal is my understanding of the position. It would allow SBGL to have flexibility in terms of cashflow/profitability position at that time, I suspect, after deal completed for LMI.

The backstop date can easily be extended should SBGL wish too, think they will give at least 3 if not 6 months to allow issues to be resolved as it is a big prize for SBGL getting LMI and 6 months takes us past election dates so could be in everyone's interest to delay!

Over 20% at close and was trading circa 25% during day. Not sure this reflects bid risk cannot see what's changed that significantly in last month as cannot see AMCU competition appeal making this a more risky transaction! The closing price has jumped at day close several times in recent weeks for no rationale reason from what I can see all a bit odd! Any ideas?

Bit confused why labour court would reject SBGL case and then ask for verification of union membership! Not sure whole story is known! A company called Capstone investment advisors bought 8m shares last week in SBGL - CNN business news not sure if relevant!

Rastuss ageee but it will take several years to commercialise this type of research which is why EXOR and Chnese are keen to secure PGM resources as the pressure to reduce carbon emissions racking up. Just my hopeful view that at least in short to medium timescales PGMs will still play a significant role. Happy to be shot down!

Rastuss thanks for update re Competiton tribunal appeal. Presumably the court has powers to increase communities protection and will do so ensuring fair and reasonable to all parties? SGBL will need to agree but do not think they will object unless ridiculous. Agree LMI Q1 figures will be poor but sure they will still have a cash surplus so not too concerned about delay as think SBGL will hold on for at least 3 months as the prize is significant for them. Agree uncertainty not good and may explain the widening LMI discount but hey ho opportunity to buy!