Member Info for FrankyS1971

Sorry but Fidelity meant 50% of the then share-price not 100% for convenience of your suggestion BB. At the time I suggested £2.20 was "not helpful" for a major investor to suggest that is an acceptable number. The article did express 50% as £2.20 that I read for the avoidance of doubt. Likely outcome today is below:

"another extension:-))" I hope Acacia refuse it.

Should say "thaw relationship"

The best thing that can happen is no offer. GOT will then crack before too long and that relationship. We go back to 5£+ not half now with offer.

Ever the pessimist on ACA I'm not sure anything will make our price move other than a deal. Sadly we need new money and external investment houses to get stuck in. What we had today was Investec and Majedie sell 21000 shares and JPM buy them. Whoopee. Nothing will help but a resolution I'm afraid. I'm not even sure if short selling might force this right down if arbitration kicks off with venom as it spells another 1-2 years of arguing. Sure it won't come to that but who in their right mind would invest in these conditions. You're either already in or sat on the sidelines with this one.

I totally agree with you BB but I'm wondering if the GOT has been suggesting there is 190 bn coming? You can imagine how Magafuli operates with his rhetoric and what the perceptions and beliefs might be on the ground! ..anyhoo..There is more to this than we know though, as refusing to deal with ACA makes no sense given the cost in lost opportunity. The reason for refusing to deal with us, is cos they and Barrick want us on the cheap and are in cahoots. This has been wonderfully stage managed but is as clear as daylight. MB came along and saw an opportunity to change the strategy up and aim for this outcome. All we need to do is sit tight, not blink and go to court. There's nothing they can really do right now (well apart from a sensible offer or nationalising the mines and I don't see either coming just yet. What we want is the GOT to get militant and threaten closure, so Barrick stump up a premium offer. MB may try to lowball us again, but we just say no and ride it out....

Barrick is merely forcing the emphasis back on the GOT here. Its on them now and not Barrick to break the deadlock, at least when he 9th is gone.... I think arbitration will rumble on until after the 2020 elections and here is why.... You see the problem is that you have a whole bunch of village chiefs who control most of the populations, who are instructed by these chiefs to vote one way or another. Magafuli has to keep the promise of sharing these fines and the money with those chiefs to get their votes. He has to maintain his position and keep this rumbling on, until after the elections by which point he has another 5 years to break his promises and kind of make it up to them! There is only a slimmish chance this will get resolved beforehand IMO as the politics and will in GOT simply isn't there. I know this isn't precisely correct but the suggestion feels about right in my stomach. As for false accounting, my only concern is that we may have had to bribe various officials previously in line with what the norm was for doing business. GOT may point at that and still claim it as being corrupt and make an example of us...pure guess but wouldn't surprise if that comes out in wash..

Still pot building and up to 2.04%...3.6% holding would be able to block a hostile bid, while currently 9% (75% of smaller shareholders) is needed. It really feels now or never for Barrick as it'll cost a lot more to ever do a deal if they miss this window. Over the next 6 months if this slips past 9th July, Odey will carry on pot building at ever cheaper prices, to get over that threshold, then he alone can block a deal unless its fair value. I'm happy waiting until next year, if it means we get 3-3.50 as opposed to 1.50 courtesy of his activist efforts. I m surprised that none of these shareholders have gone public over the last week or so to ramp up the rhetoric over Barrick's latest press release.

I can't see it happening personally. I think there will be a very low offer which will get rejected, but will be put forward to keep them in the game. Maybe what is going to happen is that arbitration will run along side the 3 parties trying to resolve the situation away from the courts at the same time. It may actually make ACA rather a volatile share. This could be £1.00 or £3.00 and its now a real guess. I still don't see why its in the GOV interest to really sort this until in or around the 2020 elections which I've said before and still feel that annoyingly it could still take that long to sort. Chicken and egg indeed...but with MB, I assume there is a board and external advisors, so he must have all round backing to play out this strategy.

Thats pretty much how I see this TT. We do have a curious advantage though which is blindingly obvious but worth a mention. There are a lot more shareholders in ACA that have to agree and only one Barrick. I believe that this actually puts the odds in our favour as there are more folk to satisfy.

no worries BB always good to get opinions.

any opinion on the asset managers buys and sells?? perhaps after talking with Barrick, they can see there won't be a deal, hence price starting to come off?

I think a more "elegant solution" is to get a shit load of TNT down North Mara and blow the f;*$ er up. I'd be willing to let my 75Gs go south, provided this was live streamed to my laptop and I could have a souvenir DVD of the event sent to my office. As far as my planned walk up Kilimamjaro goes, they can forget my tourist dollars...I'm going to tell everyone I l know, that its a shit mountain with a crappy view.

Barrick's message is we'll buy you cheap now or cheaper in a few months time.

ACA have to go legal all day long because if Barrick make an improved offer of any kind, they will open the doors for more negotiating on price, so there's no way Barrick will do that. And I can't help thinking this may not be the end game.

I am somewhat hopeful as suggested previously that this is a smart way to get the GOT in a corner. Barrick are saying "Tanzania is too risky and that's why we won't improve our offer - Sorry GOT but we did our best and now its on you as we can't do anything for another 6 months. Do you want to go through arbitration and lose all the revenue you could be making, or do you want to find a settlement???"

This might just make the GOT finally crack and resolve this, which would be a master stroke !

It would appear that Barrick are using the GOT negotiations as a Damicles sword over the head of Acacia. That they announced a deal and have now engineered the situation to suggest that there is still substantial doubt over it, is largely manufactured. The strategy has changed with Mark Bristow turning up and it is his opportunism and breathtaking greed here on display. ACA ought to make clear to the M&A panel that they do not support an extension to 9th July, as it is a waste of energy and takes MB's platform to talk shit . I also note Barrick have washed over all the valid points ACA made, regarding their legacy in Tanzania and don't acknowledge any responsibility whatsoever for past management mistakes that ACA inherited. By suggesting that they will make an offer at a bigger discount further down the line, seems to me that they will orchestrate with GOT more action against ACA. The threat over Arbitration and the damage it could do is of no interest to me personally, as it seems the only way to make the other side (by which I mean Barrick AND GOT together) politically derisk the situation and get these mines back to full production. This feels like a good 6-12 months of further hostilities.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE



Toronto, June 26, 2019 - Further to its announcement dated 19 June 2019 ("the Barrick Announcement"), Barrick Gold Corporation (NYSE: GOLD) (TSX: ABX) ("Barrick" or the "Company") today provides the following response to the announcement made by Acacia Mining plc ("Acacia") on 24 June 2019 headed "Response to announcement from Barrick regarding the situation in Tanzania and Acacia's mine plans" ("the Acacia Announcement").



Barrick notes Acacia's stated position that:

· Barrick acquiring the remaining shares in Acacia it does not currently own would be an attractive solution for all key stakeholders subject to an offer price which is fair and commands the requisite support of shareholders;

· unless a resolution is achieved in the near term, Acacia's Tanzanian assets face further risks to their operations and ability to deliver against their plans; and

· in the absence of a negotiated settlement and only as a fallback, Acacia has sought to protect Acacia's business through the contractual arbitrations, but has noted that there are significant collateral risks in Acacia's subsidiaries continuing to seek to protect their businesses through maintaining the arbitrations pending a negotiated resolution.



Barrick continues to believe that the terms of its Proposal (as defined in the Barrick Announcement) reflect the fair value of Acacia, not taking into account any further discount which could be applied to reflect the significant risk inherent in the Acacia business and remaining uncertainties of any settlement with the Government of Tanzania.



In the absence of a take-private transaction, Barrick does not consider there is any credible alternative solution which will preserve, to the extent possible, value for all stakeholders.



Barrick has considered the statements made in the Acacia Announcement and has concluded that the Acacia Announcement contains no information of which Barrick was not already aware. Barrick therefore remains firmly of the view that certain assumptions made by Acacia in relation to its mine plans are not appropriately risked or supportable and that adjustments should be made. Whilst Barrick does not consider it necessary to respond to each and every statement made by Acacia in its announcement, it wishes to underline the following key points:

· Barrick notes the reference to Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum Definition Standards (2014), ("CIM Standards") in the Acacia Announcement, and fully endorses the Acacia 2018 Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Statement, which included the update to the classification of previously reported Indicated Mineral Resources to the Inferred Resources category at Bulyanhulu to reflect the wide spaced drill data for the Deep West zone of the orebody.

· Barrick maintains that the inclusion of the Deep West Inferred Mineral Resources inventory on an equal footing to the Measure

Now increased holding to 2%!

Will the GOT now want more as the dynamics of the gold market have changed suddenly? And will the extra income for Acacia tempt the GOT to fine them more and get more militant to keep ACA in check, during the process. Hopefully not.

Hi Super...glad that helped as it can be easy to forget or miss the odd thing over time...and boy..its been a long time!!:-)

I don't see us buying out Barrick realistically but it would be a good way to force our price up as there's no way Barrick would sell Acacia at £2 per share! I can't see any prospective buyer coming in with the GOT position unless the Chinese could unlock the situation so never say never, but feels very messy and complicated and I'm sure Barrick wouldn't want to sell despite the noise!

This feels odds on to go to arbitration and then for Barrick to be in a position forcing through a hostile takeover which is ideal, as we'll get fair value given the 90% minimum threshold needed which is a high bar and only needs Odey and a couple of other dissenters to block.

I cannot for the life of me not see why they can't set the new business entity up with the 16% stake for GOT and a couple of Tanz Ds on the board. They can rebadge the business and give it a fresh start and everyones happy. Everything says 'compromise' apart from one factor, which is a thug Prime Minister.

https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/business/article/2001312842/acacia-to-sell-kakamega-gold-mine

Maybe not worth getting too excited about Kenya Super?!

This makes sense but I thought they sold up their interests in Kenya for some reason....?? reminds me to re- look at that..