We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
I'm familiar with it and posted here too and think it will be important to negotiations, NEM could push up using asset prices, DFS draft, MRE's considering the outdated data cut-off and look more at scenario 2 whilst a buyer could pull down stating Telfer liabilities, other risks and concerns towards Scenario 1. Some of it did indeed seem nonsensical using an AIM SP to try and assist - mind you the price of something is only ever what one is willing to buy it at fundamentally.
Any thoughts on the 2 different scenarios and final valuation range they concluded? I found the upside at Telfer in Scenario 2 interesting alongside the following excerpts from latest Town Hall Webinar:
https://tinyurl.com/2bhjb3dv
Excerpt 1:
* Okay Shaun which takes us neatly to Telfer, can you take us through the potential purchase of Telfer please Shaun… is Havieron economic without it and how do you deal with the liabilities associated with Telfer?
- yeah well look to some extent I spoke about the choice we have before where I think Havieron can be really attractive either way or although I think the most likely outcome is from a Newmont perspective that they'll if they're looking to tidy up their portfolio that they might think of them as a single asset
- but we don't know the mind of Newmont and I think we can be you know we can see value under either scenario
- but you know when we think about Telfer we also think about a mine in a very different stage of its life cycle to Havieron, like Havieron has all of its best days ahead of it we're excited about a multi- decade future there, by contrast Telfer has been a top five Australian Gold Mine for some 30 of its 35 years but father time captures everyone and including Telfer
- you know it's as we understand it's kind of trending towards the end of its life
- now that's actually very complimentary in many ways with Havieron and the Havieron discovery but you know it is it is a very different thought process and it does come with some rehab liabilities
- would rather those you know liabilities not be there, having said that if that… we think about the net value of the two assets combined
- so without really knowing intimately Telfer if you have a view that Havieron has a positive value but Telfer has a very small value or even a negative value, you're only paying the net value which reflects those liabilities
- so I don't see it as concerning for us, I see it as part of a very thorough due diligence
- I see it making sure you calibrate that value and in some ways it allows you to buy Havieron cheaper than you otherwise would
- so I see it as like all things there's benefits and you know and issues associated but on balance I think it's a very manageable scenario
*CONTD.
Notes from LSE TOWN HALL WEBINAR - 05 Mar 2024
https://tinyurl.com/2bhjb3dv
Link above to download interactive PDF version with slides, I'll add to GGPChat once the site is back up 🙂
Magical Mystical Powers gained from the God of AIm after completing 4 arduous years of hard labour to please them being invested here... or the more boring answer is that another poster in this thread called AmBasteir asked earlier and I was typing in the answer as you posted :-)
And an excerpt he pulled out as interesting:
There will then be a separate sub-category for companies incorporated outside of the United Kingdom with a primary listing on an overseas exchange, which the FCA deems to be “equivalent” to the FCA regime – including the ASX, TSX, TSXV and NYSE - for whom London is a secondary listing venue. This separate listing category will largely follow the rules for the existing Standard segment, for example allowing such companies to apply their preferred local corporate governance code rather than the UK Corporate Governance Code; and with no requirements in relation to significant or related party transactions. This is something we championed and included in our response to the Listing Rules reform consultation. This is important news for companies that have, or are considering, a dual listing in London, but note that companies incorporated in the United Kingdom but listed on an overseas market will not be eligible for inclusion in this category.
Thanks to Peter G on TG for sharing some details of the new regs that Shaun is considering against listing on ASX.
https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2024/uk/fca-publishes-detailed-proposals-on-the-new-listing-rules-regime#:~:text=Single%20listing%20category%20for%20commercial,new%20ESCC%20category
I've had a reply back to the follow-up email asking about the Juri JVA and Newmont's other interest in the Paterson:
__________________
email sent:
Thank you Marianna and Daniel for replying so promptly, it is very much appreciated.
I also note the JURI JVA with Greatland mentioned in the Newcrest ASX market release includes tenements held within the Paterson region.
I now recall that Newcrest agreed a farm-in agreement with Antipa Minerals for the Wilki Project also within the region. Are these projects are also being considered for exit given that divestment of Telfer and Havieron is in progress?
Kind Regards,
__________________
reply:
Hello Dip –
While we cannot speak to the specifics of the sales process, we can confirm that our teams are considering all aspects of the Telfer and Havieron tenements and agreements in place.
Thanks,
Mari
__________________
Some of these big trades are Sint trades and nothing sinister apparently, someone in the TG group has an old colleague with a good understanding of these and is gaining more information.
This PDF is a bit technical but may assist somewhat...
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.icmagroup.org/assets/documents/Regulatory/MiFID-Review/MIFIDII-the-SystematicInternaliserRegime-060417.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiu862yq-CEAxX-U0EAHdT8CMwQFnoECB4QAQ&usg=AOvVaw2_JilhIPZqKsIEzTrGFr9k
Thx all, plenty of folk here who contribute to this board and TG, so I never need any thanks and was lovely to meet more new faces such as yourself Hiphop and quieter readers of the boards and TG channels again at my 3rd TH. I wasn't annoyed by LM saying it was a fob off reply as always happy to explain my opinions or anything I post as long as someone isn't being rude :-)
@LM - I covered a response to you already in what value less specific replies to market sensitive queries can have. Investing is all about making assumptions of future outcomes and how they may affect SP, so IMO it all helps build a picture. I'm not in the habit of wasting mine or other folks time with BS, I know from experience this type of effort can lead to insights or clarify something in a poorly constructed market release so can be very useful.
You are welcome to your own opinions but you appear to be an individual who is often clouded in their thoughts. Let me explain this to you... in all of that moaning and groaning which frankly won't serve your financial future any good - not once have you ever admitted you could have used a better investing strategy here? It's all about fate or MD's/CEO's losing you money?
This is the reality of active investing on AIM in developing companies, volatile and risky and any long term hold can go against you. We've learnt that the Orphan Period doesn't get kinder to Brownfield projects, macro/sector sentiment is critical... but we might yet again soon see the better side of the coin again there - and lo and behold major discoveries aren't easy as seen on our other exploration activity .
Pre Production positioning is a potential key strategy too and perhaps in hindsight for newer investors who jumped in post funding better made closer to production, I also shared in insights from Lobo Tiggre's PPSS report if you recall? So many lessons learnt here that we can apply in future here and elsewhere - you have to look at yourself too vs blaming investments for going against you. The smart play was exiting post Maiden MRE here in hindsight, it is as simple as that to me.
LSE Town Hall Webinar from 5th March
https://youtu.be/5LdcK2GgZEA?si=rcZrbXPF6RTnSbVP
I agree it doesn't specifically state they will LM, just that they intend to honour the JVA terms which are non public besides the what I term as general framework shared in market releases or otherwise by either party
We will find out if the small print defines activity and expenditure will continue and if Shaun's opinions on their seeing this as minimal spend and general good partnership focus plays out. Said as much last night in my post and we know in loose terms that hitting ore body is expected inH2.
Easy enough to press for answers though, more useful than arguing online. Fire off a few emails or go and visit CEO at a town hall, leads to insights more so than specifics for matters that are market sensitive usually if course, but I would argue still useful in gauging your investments.
And just to finish - reply was from Marianna (Mari) Rose who is the Investor relations Director based in Denver.
I've replied asking about their intentions for the Juri JV and with Antipa given the sale of 2 key assets in the regions, will share if I get a response :-)
The email was sent onto the IR director by Daniel and the response from her is attached:
________________________________________________
Hello Dip –
Thank you for reaching out. Please see below for responses to your questions, and let us know if we can assist further.
1/ With regard to the sales process for Telfer and Havieron, our team is considering all options with the aim of maximizing value for Newmont shareholders. At this time, we are unable to comment on whether the assets will be packaged together or sold independently as the process is ongoing.
2/ The joint venture agreement is well understood by all parties, and we will continue to adhere to the agreement in place. At this time, we cannot speak to the detailed terms of the agreement, but would point you toward the press release in 2020, which detailed the key terms: https://www.newcrest.com/sites/default/files/2020-11/201130_Newcrest%20signs%20Havieron%20Joint%20Venture%20Agreement%20-%20Market%20Release.pdf.
3/ Study work continues to progress for Havieron, but we have not disclosed any dates for the decline at this time.
________________________________________________
Shaun as I posted yesterday seemed confident that due to the minimal spend this represents to a multi-billion dollar firm and their usual practices and his experience fo such that he expects they will continue decline after LCA depressuried enough. Certainly it appears if the JVA includes this kind of direction then they will do so, no doubt we'll find out in due course :-)
Shaun also called Havieron a 'dry mine' compared to many underground mines and in time it will require water from Telfer.
I just noticed that I've had a reply back from Newmont IR last night in regards to asking a few questions about the sale of the 2 assets, JVA and decline progress. Nothing too specific but seems they intend to adhere to whatever is in JVA.
My email as attached:
Dear Daniel,
I noted from latest earnings calls and interviews by the CEO that the company intends to divest Telfer and Havieron (Havieron development project being 30% owned by JV partner Greatland Gold).
My understanding is that Greatland and Newmont (formerly Newcrest) hold a Joint Venture operation and the intention is/was to process ore at Telfer and I understand that the JV partner Greatland hold a Right of Last Refusal (ROLR) on Havieron.
I understand that Telfer mine life is currently only scheduled into early FY 2025 and from reviewing Havieron progress that the decline has been paused whilst the Lower Contained Aquifer (LCA) is being depressurised.
Based on this I have a number of questions where you are able to answer:
- Are the two assets going to be able to sold independently or are they being packaged together as per the Grant Samuel valuation in the Scheme Booklet published last year, given that the current understanding is that Telfer’s mine life is likely coming to a very near-term end, so surely dependent on future Havieron ore to assist in retaining any realistic commercial value to a potential buyer considering the current margins?
- And if Greatland hold a ROLR on Havieron, surely this complicates matters for other bidders if looking to secure both assets for the above reason of ensuring commercial viability of Telfer outside any existing potential there may be in investing in other cutbacks etc.?
- Additionally, as it appears that the Havieron decline is currently in statis with the LCA being dealt with, is work still ongoing with the DFS and will work be restarted on the decline and perhaps in time the SLOS mine once the LCA has been dewatered to a sufficient level to enable work to commence.
Personally, I deem both these activities important to ensure optimal commercial value is achieved for both assets, hence my interest as dependent on progress on sales, it may take many months to negotiate and close sales of both assets.
Look forward to hearing from you.
***Reply follows in next post***
Hi, was there tonight and he seems clear that any deal would be accretive and potentially via expanding bank syndicate but if course I personally would expect some level of equity required by banks.
His opinion is that Newmont would continue developing Hav as a minimal amount of money for a multi billion corporation and adds value, much like Newmont IR have confirmed to someone on TG the DFS will continue.
What he feels I thought is that GGP has the money, the knowledge of assets to enable quick due diligence and a good relationship and Newmont like to work that way too in his experience of them so confident of doing the deal.
Definitely thinking a while till a deal though after tonight as he initiated as much in that no formal talks or process defined by Newmont yet and feels they may focus on North American assets first, so a few months IMO
We still need clarification that Newmont will continue development spending as he just gave an opinion, hasn't been discussed it seemed to me yet, much like Newmont not having yet initiated a process for selling these 2 assets.