Member Info for Equanimity

Thanks, Rob. Well, regarding the price of gold, if you look at the WGC graph, more than 60% of the gold producers had AISC higher than $1200 in 2023. Even $1600 would bankrupt the entire gold industry after the recent inflationary increase in costs, cutting the gold supply. Hypothetically, I could see the $1600 in extreme situations, like the 2008 liquidity crisis, but it would not stay there for more than a few days.

Suppose we get credit sign off from the second bank. What are the remaining risks between that and funds drawdown / TK construction start? Do you see anything (apart from the new war) that can derail the deal after that? Thanks.

ARTAR funded £3.5 million of KEFI's 2023 contributions for 2% share of GMCO. Of course, KEFi was in distressed circumstances, with no cash available. Yet, if we accept this valuation, the remaining 25% of GMCO should be worth at least £43.75 million. Current market cap is £32 million. TK is for free.

Kadavul, when someone wants you to sell, he/she usually wants to buy more. Basic logic.

Tony probably acts in his self-interest. He is trying to convince you to sell your shares. Sadly, the lack of integrity is typical on this board. It makes people voicing opposite opinions about the same company, depending on their current position. Like Erik, Tornadotony lost his reputation. His posts about Shanta are partial, and evidence presented is selection-biased. The real danger is that he and his cronies accumulate shares to vote for the takeover.

I have no doubt it is a 5-bugger, provided the construction is started, and a 10-bugger after the first gold pour at TK. It can be more if the gold price goes higher, and/or if Saudi is on track.

Little turmoil is always good, provided that after it we will have a stock valued at 25-50p and BOD aligned with shareholders.

If the gold price goes up (and there is no higher offer), the takeout will be voted down and the stock price will appreciate. If the gold price goes down, we will dampen the shares to Patel for 13.65.

My take is that the conditions mentioned are related to security and community relocation. These are quite natural conditions, the lender should not bear a risk related to government efficiency. Force majeure precedents. The RNS is super positive, we will probably see a stronger price reaction in the next few days.

"Full Project launch, including funding drawdown, is on course for H1 2024, subject to the satisfaction of all the standard conditions precedent for a transaction of this type, independent confirmation that the Project is ready for launch from security and community standpoints, and final board approvals of all parties."

Adw198

I am not asserting anything, I am using logic. Let's think together. Suppose that price is hitting 13.65. You have shares and intend to vote Yes. It is rational for you to sell your shares immediately at 13.65 or higher (assuming there is a bid for your size), rather than vote YES and wait for the proceedings. So you sell. Who would be the buyer? Evidently, a party which intends to vote No (why would they buy otherwise?) So the mere fact that the share price reaches 13.65 and is liquid enough at that price guarantees a No vote.

Voting Yes would be irrational. Offer rejection would either force Patel to increase, or push the share price much higher, allowing institutions to liquidate at better prices. Fundamentals must overrule short-term myopic behaviour.

There will be people here trying to convince you that "this is dead money at 13.65", "invest elsewhere", etc. These people want your shares cheap.

I don't see why the share price should be bound by 13.5, provided there is a probability for the rejection of the TO. Just for clarity, assume the gold price is 2500. Probability of "NO" vote would be close to 100%. Why on earth would the price of Shanta stay below 13.5 in such case?

Mathematically, Current Price = (13.65 * Probability(YES vote) + implied market price * Probability(NO Vote)). You can apply an individual discount factor for 2 months of waiting.

Of course, probabilities above depend on the price, as the price signals voting intentions.

If the current price is, say, 14.0, and you believe it will go to 25-30 in this cycle, would you vote for 13.5 TO? You can sell shares immediately for 14.0. It would not change anything regarding voting, because the buyer would not vote for the offer either. Going higher than 13.5 would signify alternative equilibrium in game theory.

Please note that even Lombard has not given an irrevocable undertaking. They gave a letter of intent, which is non-binding. Would Lombard vote for the offer if the market price is much higher than 13.5?

Adw198

It may be on the contrary. Once it gets to the offer price or higher, chances for the take out to get voted through drop to virtually zero. So the share price will advance further, breaking the 13.65 ceiling and setting a completely new game.

Pedro61 is filtered. I don't know why you waste time on the guy promoting tiny illiquid stock.

Tornadotony

I am pretty sure you hold quite a few shares. And you would probably be OK to get more, below 13.0. It is good to find things we do not know. The problem is that most likely, your information cannot be trusted. Sorry for being direct.

This is a classic information campaign operation. You have a "good" guy (Tornadotony), who published valuable supportive information for a week or so, earning trust. Once trust is earned, a knowledgeable accomplice (mrtibbles) joins the play, with the reference to the analyst who uncovered bad things in the past. Tornadotony adds credibility to the guy. Like mrtibbles said, "Obviously everyone will make their own decisions on whom to trust and whether to stay or get out."

I see a subtle orchestrated campaign to sow the seeds of doubt and kick people out of their shares from Tornadotony and mrtibbles. Some respectable analysts will confide to us that Shanta reporting is a scam, that NL LOM is not extendable, that Singida is unscalable (despite geological evidence and ease of doubling the production), disputes with the Tanzanian government, etc. Be careful whom you trust on this board.

I think the share price will be higher than 13.5 long before the voting commences (beginning of January is likely). Main reason is game theory - once we break through 13.5, the "NO" vote is essentially guaranteed, and the share price will follow its natural laws. There is also a high probability for better offers, which is not priced in.

Why is the price so low now? Main reason is that some people assumed 13.5p TO is a done deal, and are moving money to the other gold stocks in anticipation of the seasonal Chinese NY rally. I think that is an unwise thinking. The reward-to-risk is much higher in SHG at the moment, for the reasons I explained earlier.