Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
I understood it to be 33 assuming 12.5 but having reread the Proactive article perhaps there is some ambiguity.
Seems the Berenberg uncertainty principle applies in one more dimension.
Does anyone have the actual broker note to refer to rather than a report of it?
I appreciate you can't hit the motherload first time, every time, but I find it difficult to square yesterday's results with the positivity I have felt coming from the company while we have been waiting - notably GH's online written interview (26/10 I think - sorry, I'll struggle to find the link now). As I have full trust in Gervaise, I can't come up with a better explanation than the next set of results will be a lot better. Time will tell. Meanwhile I'm heavily invested and holding. I am confident the current SP undervalues HAV long term - Scally and the rst are a bonus. GLA, D.
Sanibel, I stand to be corrected by others more knowledgeable, but what I understood from last time is that by its rules, GDXJ is constrained to buy during the closing auction on Friday. More fool them (or their investors) but there you go.
The bit I liked, I think it was in answering the question about differentiation from competitors, was when Gervaise said something along the lines of - we might pop up with acquisitions of new prospects where least expected.
I just re-re-listened to the brr interview.
Putting aside the interesting question why it needed to be totally scripted on both sides, there was something that hasn't been discussed yet.
From 5:35, on the Juri JV, Gervais says, "these are attractive terms, particularly as measured on a per square kilometre basis".
Can anyone help me understand the point about the per square kilometre basis please?
Thanks, D.