Member Info for Fozdog

I’m logically trying to look at this - as both pi and m&g your supposed to say no.
However doesn’t mean no to a deal for m &g just means no to current one.
My only concern is the m&g fund had a change in the manager on the recovery fund, performance looks relatively poor till this year....Let’s just hope they are getting inflows!!!

Hi xtw I don’t think any of us being naive here. I don’t dispute Hanwa and board intentions.
Think as we’ve said before it’s down to m and g and pis or combination of others and pis to block this. We need 75% votes of the capital left minus ganfeng. They’ve prob taken time and not received their additional issue shares yet as the more they own that 75% becomes much more sole on m&g!

It’s unlikely regulatory blocks it but again doesn’t hurt to have at least tried. I emailed the department of energy and others have also.
I will believe if the board recommends this deal and I expect to hear why they do - as my right as a shareholder they need to inform us all of reason why and their renumeration.
If that looks suspect which I expect it will as does this whole process from raise to now, then I think there’s a much larger pressing case for regulators.
However that’s always an opinion and facts need to ascertained.

I also hope that m and g as smart investors will say no because if ganfeng then go above 30% to go hostile they have to pay terms above higher price share paid. Which to go above from here is higher than 45p....

Who knows it sits in a fund, m and g are much less emotional than we are!

We will have time but it’s remembering that the cut off will be our providers / custodian than the company deadline. It could be 4-5 working days ahead of that.

Whatever the outcome we’ve had a good fight just got to see what comes out, get the official view and answer from board. Then the lobbying begins again but at least it’s put a question mark in blockers heads I hope!

Not sure John think you’re looking for a move that’s not there....it’s finely balanced here and for all speculation reasons. 1 - regulatory , 2 - blocking stakes and intentions, 3 - formal offer rather than intention 4 - new buyers in for a quick turn 5 - new buyers in to try block etc.
Just got to wait now and let it hover around 55p

Have to give credit to Dee he’s done a fantastic job of trying to create at least some opposition here. Combination of pis and m&g are enough, same with credit ag and robecco and pis.
Sadly the article was a little soft in my view but it’s publicity all same.

Tmac I don’t think anyone disagrees in broad sense with your comments but it’s still a regulatory hurdle and one I think the U.K. will look at.
Regardless where mine situated it doenst mean the U.K. can’t consider this a strategic resource. If you said would the U.K. stop it if Cornish metals ... 99% block it.
Being bcn there’s a small chance they have some say/involvement to that point.

Regardless we are all sitting waiting to know more and then can at least press bcn once/if deal is announced as they have to be transparent with us.

I also have a horrible feeling ....they will try sneak this around the bank hols let’s see!

Ok boarderbob let’s try to engage you, acafp I would assume could be part of their banks dealing activities or it could be part of their asset manager taking a stake? How are you reading it? Someone that’s acquiring to agree the deal and take the 20% or someone that’s trying to achieve a blocking stake? What do you think it is?
Regarding the 8m timetable, not taking about the June 3rd date I’m talking about outbound conditions that need to be met and that’s not something that can be waived as it’s down to Poc.
Will it take that time no, but again that’s a risk it does.

I’m trying to engage you so what’s your view on acafp (credit agg)?

Hi John, for me there’s two - one with U.K. and then one with znwd. My assumption has always been they have a ready buyer for znwd stake such as emh. Could be completely wrong here but I strongly think that’s the case.

Dutton lot of posters written on this, rather than asking for a rehash maybe read back through.
This can be blocked with circa 18.7% of the share capital, that’s M&G plus robecco or M&G and pi”s and other pockets.
No one saying this is getting blocked by pi”s all hinges on m&g but people are lobbying.
Still think fair bit of work getting this past regulatory hurdles.
Just don’t think it’s prudent to say “risk free” there’s not even formal bid yet even if most scheme of arrangements end up in one.
Even if it does go through there’s nothing “risk” free about it so loading up for 20% that could take 8 months with some risks attached...there’s a lot that might not bother. I won’t be sitting here if it’s in low 60s and that’s the timetable to wait for.
Hence for my personal view just everything about the deal is weak.
Best of luck

Agree Nomad, our board seem oblivious atm

What I don’t understand, how can you release this update with strategic decisions in it when we don’t even know the outcome of the possible bid?
“Operational update” do me a favour there’s absolutely sod all in there.

John/Nomad I get what you are saying and there will be plenty prob happy to take and run.
However there are several things to think about and
Argue against.
First is as shareholders we do not know the buyer of our company’s intentions and why. If they had suddenly uncovered the worlds biggest diamond would you sell? Under a takeover we have the rights to facts from the buyer and the official opinion of the Board. That includes the reports you mention and board remuneration etc.
That includes znwd which Im also a shareholder in and the impact it has there if ganfeng dumped their stock they got from this deal.
That includes the £7mn was it we gave znwd in cash? Which is worth about double that now. It’s over £13mn stake which I’m accounting to be worth 5p+
I am getting to that because that was what it was worth at time of 45p raise (znwd has been priced there for a while) and that raise feels so untoward to me. As Iv said before I don’t not believe that was done correctly and I feel that it kept the sp lower to have a lower 50% premium bid.
If you do the correct raise and premium you get into the 80s so that alone proves this isn’t a good premium more like 20% v what I believe the cap raise should and more importantly could have been done at.
Look how quickly the money was raised. There were Corp pitches going on way before this and imo the board have not acted in our best interests here (marginalising pis for a quick 2 hour turn around to get a chance to buy it).
Secondly I bought this long term and was 2.5y in as well as buying at 15.3p and all the way down to avg just shy 30p. My understanding was strategic partnership to production and therefore been lied to. I supported us throughout the pandemic kept buying kept averaging down. I feel taken advantage of.
Thirdly I doubt we are Corp experts when it comes to documentation - this deal could take 8months. Let’s be clear you decrease the time value of money for being locked up here and have to risk adjust it we could have been through 67.5p with just developments at the mine in that time.
More worryingly do you think there won’t be possible clauses in our deal? Maybe state ones regarding Mexico or licences? Do you want to sit on that risk for small upside? I don’t want to sit there with accepted deal waiting months as they magically get a move and seriously further down the line during that time. And my best option is to sell at 60p as that’s where the market is than sit there whilst they rapidly unlock all the value.

Let’s be clear this deal stinks, the board has been inept throughout and I do not trust them. We could get to 67.5p before we even got our money back on completion of this deal, I believed for a long time get through Mexico mid terms and favourable reports...we would be 70p+.

Funny you used that expression bob, seems to apply to you - they just irritate you, landing on your face and creating a cloud around your head? They're gnats.

the tide has turned John....! Welcome to cynicism!!!
So begs q - If they are inept or have bene operating in their interests maybe its time to remove secker?

Lol it’s my down time on the train into work!

Hintza sorry damn phones with making its own decisions!

Nomad if they make a formal offer there’s a few things that have to happen.
Shareholders have to have sufficient information and board recommendation. That information has to contain Ganfeng intention etc regarding why making a bid. That statement also becomes legally binding if make a formal bid and fail.
Any incentives received by the board have to be declared. So we should know the answer to below and we can request it if we get to formal offer.

There’s a lot left in this as Haztma said, get prepared for some turbulence it will get volatile.

John it’s another 8.3 form, ignore it.
I can’t remember exactly and I’ll double check but my best understanding......there’s two things here.
If gangfeng do not make a formal bid And went back into the open market to buy shares the moment they went above another 1% figure ie 28.8 to 29 they would trigger an rns. I’m pretty sure market would ramp past 67.5p.
They would also have to make an mandatory bid if they crossed 30% and my understanding it would have to be at the same terms indicated ie 50% premium to last share bought. So why go out to market pay almost 55p then have to make a formal bid if cross 30%?

I would also expect there is some restriction post a failed bid.
However given this is intention rather than binding I’m not quite sure rules.
If they make a formal bid and fail, they can come back and try again but I expect there are restrictions of buying shares in open market, and again whatever they buy more at a new bid takes that into account.

They could try to get to over 50% but again in doing so trigger a formal bid and it takes into account the new price they’ve bought shares at.

A failed bid owning above 30% does not mean you are forced to sell.

Again I’ll ask someone in the know but with a put up or shut up scenario, they either make bid by deadline or don’t. My understanding is if don’t cannot make another attempt for 6 months unless its at better terms?
I’m really testing the memory and will ask someone.

Lol boringBob you’ve read it but not understood it clearly! You’ve also not understood what Iv wrote, and you clearly don’t understand the format of a controlling interest and relevance in U.K. takeover rules. Tbh not materially dissimilar to the US so don’t try to paint yourself as some naive us investor.

To all others on the board please do not get influenced by these underhand tactics.

R7 unless I’m mistaken do you not have to only declare a holding when go above 3% so these funds are just responding to 8.3? I don’t think it’s new positions being declared.

BoringBob the acquirer is Ganfeng - The rule 8.3 under takeover code would apply to them not a group of PIs who have voting shares. We vote IF it becomes a firm offer as per June 3rd put up or shut date (or agreement to extend).
Really not sure what the point of your post is and even worse Ive now been dragged into your web!