Member Info for Dip666

Just register and log into the platform and submit questions beforehand, obviously best to keep in mind worth asking what they are able to answer under the 'rules' :-)

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/investor/company/alien-metals-limited

He's currently on a top secret operation..............who did you think was getting the new Bond gig.......... :-)

@Mumbo - No one here has the expertise and clairvoyant abilities to accurately predict something like the FMV value as it's not just a technical decision, there are random factors such as both can agree to something unexpected around the existing process. Did you bother reading any of the information sources signposted or look at conducting comparative analysis using the examples Hydro informed you of?

What reassures me the outcome should be OK is:
1/ The process in place can't be changed unless both agree, NCM agreed to it from the outset when they agreed the Havieron JV I assume, when they could have been less ethical perhaps
2/ The process lends itself to sensible valuations IMO
3/ The Valmin code and the example valuation I studied in some depth make allowances for exploration targets/ground and if a value can not be agreed then both parties need to have considered valuations using the code being used to assessed theirs against, after all, it will be the value that the 3rd party determines is the closest to their opinion of FMV that would then get used
4/ We have a solid, experienced and well respected team of staff/consultants working on our behalf at GGP
5/ To date Newcrest have played fair with us on both JV's and the immense pressure on large corporations to be ethical and their own focus on this in their comms and conduct, especially in Australia where they have First Nations/People aspects to navigate.

I always vote remotely Twiggy for any stock I own if not attending teh AGM - essential to use your votes I feel :-)
iWeb sends me a postal ballot and Interactive Investor has a voting portal and apparently have started to auto enroll all their investors now.
Worth finding out and voting with your platform - resolutions below:

1 TO RECEIVE THE ACCOUNTS AND REPORTS OF THE DIRECTORS AND OF THE AUDITOR FOR THE YEAR ENDED 30 SEPTEMBER 2021 (A response to this proposal is mandatory)
Board Recommendation: For

2 TO ELECT MR J COLE WHO IS SUBJECT TO ELECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION (A response to this proposal is mandatory)
Board Recommendation: For

3 TO REAPPOINT CROWE U.K. LLP AS AUDITOR OF THE COMPANY AND TO AUTHORISE THE DIRECTORS TO FIX THEIR REMUNERATION (A response to this proposal is mandatory)
Board Recommendation: For

4 THAT THE DIRECTORS BE AUTHORISED TO ALLOT SHARES IN THE COMPANY OR TO GRANT RIGHTS TO SUBSCRIBE FOR OR TO CONVERT ANY SECURITY INTO SHARES IN THE COMPANY (A response to this proposal is mandatory)
Board Recommendation: For

5 THAT SUBJECT TO THE PASSING OF RESOLUTION 4, THE DIRECTORS BE GIVEN POWER TO ALLOT EQUITY SECURITIES FOR CASH (A response to this proposal is mandatory)
Board Recommendation: For

They will for sure be looking into the meta if not already have something planned I am sure :-)

While we're still guessing on what the FMV value will be pegged at, here are some further thoughts :-
- NCM to date have been professional in regards to all matters with our Havieron and Juri JV's, undervaluing 5% does them no favours as they are the majority partner. They might of course but we'll find out in a few weeks now and I assume SD will communicate some feedback after the conclusion to get GGP teams insight and opinion on it.
- The opinion of existing and potential partners of working with NCM could be either vastly enhanced or damaged dependent on how they proceed with the valuation, along with the pressures larger corporations have nowadays in being ethical.
- I'm assuming NCM want to work with other companies who might find another discovery in the region and they are very strong in communicating partnership and ethical approaches in all their comms and with their brand positioning.
- Valmin valuation methods have techniques to put values on exploration ground/targets for those who have taken the time to look into the code and how it can be applied with at least two of the three approaches they outline in the code.
- You get some wide variations from using the same techniques/different metrics and different techniques/same metrics with many of the methods, I really feel GGP/NCM both will want to avoid this random element if an independent 3rd party is to determine which of their two final values is to be considered as the official price (if difference between both over 10%) and try and work together for a more controlled outcome IMO.
- If NCM come in too low-ball with their final number (from our opinion) then we can assume with some confidence that GGP will have a final valuation over 10% higher and trigger the need for an independent party to come in and fingers crossed pick ours.
- GGP have access to all of the information NCM have and any 'fair' valuation will take in some assumptions made for the less defined areas for valuation purposes so likely not to be ignored.
- The nature of the agree process definitely lends itself to 'sensible' valuations by all parties.
- The process is not fixed, if both are happy to implement a change or agree something then they free to do so.
- GGP also has very experienced staff in conjunction with free access to independent experts that will be able to build a strong case for a fair valuation and future assumptions.
- Perhaps if this is a very amenable process, then both teams initially agree a framework to use to come to their values at the outset to try and ensure closer synergy and less conflict, it is something I would try and initiate negotiations with personally.
- Let's be honest, both PI sentiment and SP are always hard matters to predict on AIM and even harder to predict an outcome for the FMV value, better to focus on the data in the forthcoming results and MRE (which could give some clues on FMV value perhaps) and just adopt a 'wait and see' approach and chill :-)

Fingers crossed mate and the statement from them (copied below) in particular is extremely confident and promising along with the pics we've all seen already - hopefully the same is true for our assays for Hav North and Zipa :-)

• Company believes it may have already intersected target gold- copper mineralisation but requires assays to confirm. Assays are expected March 2022

• Visual inspection of first drill holes into Apollo Target provide significant encouragement with “Havieron-like” geology encountered
• Drilling targeted to recommence mid - Q1 2022
• Starter resource of 3.4Moz Au and 160kt Cu (52Mt @ 2.0g/t Au, 0.31% Cu) announced in December 2020. Expected to grow significantly over coming years
• Analysts believe Havieron may support bulk mining underground methods at grades well in excess of those mined at Telfer today
Company believes and drilling confirms favourable regional and local geology that host Havieron continues into Artemis ground
• Major crustal thrust fault and secondary splay fault “plumbing” that transect Havieron continue into Artemis ground
• Regional “heat engine” Granites interpreted to be widespread beneath Artemis ground
• Current drill programme is focused on the Atlas and Apollo targets
• Apollo drilling is concentrated on a 500m wide gravity ridge that extends from the Newcrest JV ZIPA drill target
• Apollo/Atlas drilling is also focused on a North-trending gravity ridge that extends from the Newcrest JV Havieron North drill target
• In late 2021 the Newcrest JV drilled at both ZIPA and Havieron North, assays are pending
• 4 holes completed in late 2021 and a 5th hole lost before target depth for a total of 3,012m
• Highly encouraging geology intercepted in GDRCD007 drilled from the Apollo 3 Pad
• Key target rock types successfully intercepted including;
• Altered sulphidic diorite that appears similar to a diorite at the core of Havieron
• A high-temperate alteration assemblage of Quartz- Calcite-Chlorite-Actinolite +/- Biotite
• In places a significant Sulphide content of Pyrite +/- Chaclopyrite +/- Pyrrhotite
• Assays pending (expected March)
Phase 1 drilling to recommence as soon as the climactic conditions are tolerable. Expected to be early March. Rigs already secured
• Priority is to follow-up encouraging geology encountered in GDRCD007 and to complete the much-anticipated Hole at Apollo 4 and drill the main gravity anomaly centre beneath the Apollo 2 pad
• Company believes it may have already intersected target gold- copper mineralisation but requires assays to confirm. Assays are expected March 2022
• Assays are listed as pending for Newcrest JV drilling from just 400m away at ZIPA and Havieron North
• Fully permitted to drill throughout 2022 at Atlas, Apollo and the Northern Targets of Juno and Voyager
• Company intends to concurrently undertake heritage and access work for the Southern Enterprise Targets with the aim of drilling these in H2

Some interesting comments and slides in first 13 pages in regards to their nearby drilling from our neighbours :-)

https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02475937-6A1072398?access_token=83ff96335c2d45a094df02a206a39ff4

I think with the challenges in obtaining equipment, manpower and lengthy timeframes for lab results not dissipating within the industry, especially in Oz, we have to take onboard that there are going to be delays in exploration activities and obtaining results that impact the required feasibility studies, JORC estimates and in turn the timelines for going into production for Han****. Obviously, will slow down progress on our other projects too, even Newcrest are experiencing the same issues.
I do think Bill really favours JV/divestment as a primary strategy vs any desire for becoming a producer and plenty of chance that could occur as M&A picks up even more in the sector moving forward into 2023, I also think that we really really need sentiment to return back to the sector before we seem the really large moves in SP regardless of what good news we have in the meantime.

Fair enough silverfoil and welcome to the party LOL
Intuition/gut feel does play a part in most things TBF and I felt that twinge when researching GGP and I never ignore it, but I still like to ensure that the more speculative investments I make have something of intrinsic value that can help them through low points and well ........ you're in luck as GGP certainly does with Havieron :-)
As for Neil Woodford, I was interested when he went his own way but remember asking a friend - how much of his success was him VS talented staff in his team?
I've certainly made some former bosses look good in my early career while they enjoyed both the spoils and credit for my ideas and hard work (promotions and awards no less lol) so laid off investing in his funds, maybe he just had a bad run but does make you wonder :-)

Have to say buying something you personally define as high risk into your pension without DD is at best lazy and at worst silly mate :-)

No doubt you're not the only person looking at GGP at these levels though - so hope these help as a starting point:-

https://ggphelp.co.uk/
https://greatlandgold.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/GGP-Growth-Update-Final.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65pYtW9DVus
https://greatlandgold.com/projects/
https://greatlandgold.com/news/videos/

Sorry to hear about your dad Matty and my deepest sympathies for you and your family, a great deal of respect for looking after your dad the way you have, it's a circle, they raise us and one day it's our turn to return the love and sacrifices they made for us.

@zoros every time you say "Hi Dip - good to talk" - I get a mental picture of Bob Hoskins and the old BT adverts lol
I was thinking a bit about the fact that both can in theory agree to something besides 'the agreed process' if both are happy, what could Shaun propose as an alternative.....
Here's a bit of a weird, overly optimistic scenario perhaps that NCM could cover the loan and development costs for the starter mine (certainly in their favour to have that side of things covered for us leaving the road to production clear) and just do some kind of deal for future value for anything above the known value now.
Bit of a crazy example - but for all we know they might go for something a bit different to the process is what I really mean , but I do think they want to ensure GGP has no issues in funding our share of development costs - so this is paramount in their objectives.
Also, NCM seem keen on moving quickly and they do have other concerns besides Havieron so might be they want to tick this 5% off to get on with other things too elsewhere as part of their overall corporate strategy. The way I still feel about GGP is how much will I profit and will it be over many years or a shorter timeframe.

LOL I'd settle for £30 or £3 per share Mikey when they relist , might call iWeb tomorrow and point out they need to sort it out as end of tax year valuation if suspended that long would be way off!

@Golden
To me "fair" doesn't mean GGP lose 30 percent of true value so surely you would go with the higher value if it is ours if adhering strictly to the process. But your other example could play out I guess which is why makes sense for both to be sensible.
I think both teams are professional, have relevant experience of how valuations adhering to the code might work out and will be sensible.
I just haven't seen signs of impropriety or unprofessional conduct from either during the entire JV and the JURI JV seems cordial and professionally conducted to date as well.
I think people need to chill out and just let things play out as out of our control so non point in worrying about it ;-))

@Barnard - shame given my iweb sipp is showing £30 a share lol

@CJ

RNS link:
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/GGP/update-re-havieron-joint-venture-rsd7s9fzp0lvtzi.html

Excerpt:
Under the joint venture agreement, if the option exercise price cannot be agreed by this date, each party is thereafter required to notify the other of its assessment of fair market value. If both parties' assessments are within 10% of each other, the option exercise price will be the average of those assessments. If both parties' assessments are not within 10% of each other, the parties will proceed to independent expert determination, with the expert being required to determine which of the values nominated by the parties is to be the fair market value.

I also emailed GGP my understanding as below of entire process :
1) Newcrest want to agree the option exercise price by mid feb 2022,
2) If Newcrest/GGP do not mutually agree on a Fair Market Value by this date then both parties put forward their own valuations
3) If both valuations are within 10% of each other, then the average will be considered the valuation for Newcrest to exercise their 5% option.
4) If there is a greater than 10% disparity, an independent expert is brought in to choose which one of the estimates is fair market value, so I assume that is the price that needs to be paid by Newcrest.
5) Newcrest then has 30 business days to exercise its option to acquire the additional 5%.
6) Should they choose to go ahead, then proceeds from the exercise will be used to repay the outstanding balance of the existing loan we have from Newcrest.

Excerpt from email reply:
Your summary of the 5% option exercise, fair market valuation process and timeline is accurate. It’s worth noting that these parameters are subject to change based on mutual agreement between the parties.

@Zoros - yes mate, if they can't agree on a value or agree a value within 10% to pick the mid-point, then an independent party comes in and determines which of the two values is closer to FMV and that becomes the official price for NCM to consider paying.

This in itself should keep both parties sensible IMO, really makes it random bringing in a 3rd party - why risk the unknown as I noted earlier as you can get some wide variations in value, personally were I Sandeep or Shaun - I'd try to come to an agreed price within 10% to avoid the random nature of a 3rd party - and this is possible if both sides are realistic about both the known and unknown.

As you say, SD could indeed sell Hav but personally I doubt it is something he wants to do, I do think a few things would need to factor into him being convinced of this option:
1/ NCM would really have to put forward something extra extra special to convince him of selling Hav IMO:
- he knows how rare a discovery such as Havieron is and the ability the revenue will give him to build up a solid company in the years ahead
2/ We hit elsewhere so he figures he could use the funds to help develop our own asset, but again, surely the revenue from Havieron and a mix of bank funding could achieve this?
3/ Or he feels he can buy a particular asset he has earmarked from proceeds of a sale perhaps, but as above, in time the revenue from Havieron and bank funding also allows this?

Both teams will have the same info to hand, how they interpret it will be key in how they value the 5% and one thing I noted looking at the code and related documentation and studying the SRK valuation was how you can determine very wide ranges using differing methods or even use the same method but applying different metrics, however am 100% confident the the agreed process should keep a check on any silliness from either side so not concerned and to date have found both NCM and GGP's conduct (under Shaun) very professional. The presentations outlining the PFS and growth update and RNS's for instance have improved a great deal.
Also, as an email reply I had from GGP querying my understanding of the FMV process over xMas pointed out ".....It’s worth noting that these parameters are subject to change based on mutual agreement between the parties." The FMV process is not fixed, I doubt Shaun is going to agree to anything outside the process that isn't beneficial to GGP and the shareholders.
Again, I have to go back to the fact of the high calibre of new staff that have come to GGP of late, Shaun must be reassuring them of his intentions for GGP to continue on as there is zero guarantee they'd still have jobs if GGP was taken over, why would some of them leave longstanding jobs in quality companies to come to GGP if they feared the above being very likely?