RE: That tweet3 Aug 2025 20:44
(1) .."It [the GIS 20%] was given away like green shield stamps for some corporate costs and DR test work. ZERO towards mine construction."
That's an odd interpretation!
Let me 'splain it to you : (1) GLEN had 100% of the 'marketing OR offtake rights' .....and was sitting on its hands/had other priorities (including perhaps even that much-vaunted RIO tie-up) + continued zero interest in fronting/financing greenfield. In other words, offtake in GLEN's hands was a wasted resource. (2) With GLEN's departure, ZIOC is right to summarise the impact 'Offtake returned to the Company [which means] AVAILABLE TO BE MONETISED'.
The DR test work that you now dismiss (+ all the other value enhancing measure announced) - but got you excited when announced - are (modest but necessary) expenditures that have to be financed somehow BEFORE there can be any meaningful discussion about the finance of mine construction.
Would you rather see further equity placement(s)/dilution?
The key word is MONETISATION, which can take many forms and 'cover a multitude of sins' (1 Peter 4:8)....perhaps even the FEED financing, as I've speculated.
(2).."one wonders what Mick Davis and Gagan Gupta think of it. Both are outside of the Greymont Bay cabal* that seemingly have MADE OFF WITH * 20% of the offtake via GIS. MD and GG paid 4.1p yet without the potentially extraordinarily lucrative GIS side gig.."
* until we see what GIS DOES with its allocated offtake (which we should be told), your interpretation is open to challenge....and your language certainly unhelpful.
For one thing, it'll hardly encourage management to continue the 'special relationship' that you've so often hinted at.
Have you approached AT/MK - and, failing them the Nomad - with your concerns?
If not, why not?
As to your Q, for starters, it would have been rash in the extreme of Greymont /ZIOC management NOT to have been upfront with Sir Mick about the GIS aspect if it was a potential dealbreaker (for the very serious reputational reasons YOU'VE alleged)...at the very least undiplomatic to blindside or ruffle feathers unnecessarily if the consortium of new investors are all expected to be pulling together.
GG, for his part, was fully aware of how the GIS aspect was presented to the public and YET 2 weeks later increased his investment in the Second Tranche:
.."Following a request from Gagan Gupta, Founder and CEO of Arise, who also invested in the Fundraise, to increase his investment in ZIOC, Greymont Bay has provided Gagan Gupta the right to commit a further US$0.30 million of the Additional T2 Subscription, reducing Greymont Bay's Additional T2 Subscription to US$1.20 million."
You seem to 'love the business', hate the management...which presumably accounts for your blowing hot and cold in your views, veering between 'No opinion' and 'Strong Buy'.
Venting here changes nothing.
Get a grip, man.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
