Member Info for Jerryspaniel

DanMar, I think you are making a basic error by assuming that the market is efficient and that every move can be explained. It isnt and it cant. Maybe over a longer period, say 3 months, things can be explained away more rationally. So I wouldnt look too much into todays move any more than any other 1 day move. The bid/ask for most of the day has been much larger than the daily move.

Totally agree rcgl2. Various studies have proven that buyers overpay. In addition to your reasons I would add that the advisors are incentivised to get a deal done and, possibly the most important fact, the seller knows far more about the asset than the buyer does.
However value is different things to different people, and so Solgold might be able to justify selling out for say 70p or a pound, and BHP could equally justify paying a lot more than that.
When all said and done, deals are never done for multiples of the current share price. 25-40% over the current price is a good guide. Sometimes more, sometimes less. For those that want £2, they had better hope the pfs gets us to £1.40. It wont.

Morning Quady. Does your post mean that for you to believe that BHP will bid, you need to see a statement from BHP saying that they will overpay?

Morning Bozi. It looks like that RNS can be read either way. The option to appoint a person to the board is under the SSA which has ended. But it also states that they have the right to a board seat if they hold 10%.
My reading is the right is only under the SSA and so doesnt exist anymore.
When I met NM just after BHP did the deal, NM didnt think BHP would take up its option, and he was right, which wasnt a first but was pretty rare!

I am expecting NC to accept most bids. It would be interesting if they declined and the rationale for that.
The lower the bid, the more likely others would come in which might encourage bhp to pay more on the basis it’s an agreed deal.

At a pound BHP would have over 50% IMO, and I think that would be true at a much lower level. Then BHP can change the board and dilute the hell out of the existing shareholders by building Alpala on equity finance. So the other shareholders will cave….

Hear…I can spell really!

Morning Bamps. So assuming that a conveyor decline will be built, at what stage would we here about that? After pfs? Or after dfs? After the first decline is complete?
Appreciate all your brilliant work on here.

Morning all. Question for the intelligent experts on here. If we/they know that they will need a second decline for the conveyor system etc, why don’t they start that now? Seems time is being wasted not running work in parallel?
Oh and by the way it’s not mms that are messing with the stock, it’s small fry investors who are baling cos they don’t understand nor do they have the courage to stand the course. But it gives us all great top up opportunities.

Morning addicknt. I have just done a very long and laborious search looking for mining companies that have said that they WILL overpay for assets. Guess what, I didn’t find any!
Of course all buyers say they won’t overpay, because they are talking to shareholders who were invested at the top of the last cycle, when they all overpaid for assets. It happens in most cycles and is usually the signal that the top is here.
So BHPs statement is completely worthless and means nothing.
As to why BHP will be content with 14%? I might just do another search on how many other assets BHP own 14% of.

Unknown Quady. All we know is that 57.43% are not in public hands, whatever that means. So not very diverse at all. In fact if it went into GDXJ it would get a massive haircut for the lack of diversity.

Now now Addicknt, dont be coming on here with your logic. What about the diverse book? (which is actually not diverse at all, its quite concentrated really. So really should be the lack of diversity argument...)

I presume you mean lent out?

KP. Best post of the day. Totally agree. Only solution will be to filter all the people who engage with this buffoon…..

You have my best wishes RK. Not a subject I feel very comfortable talking about, so will just say that I wish you and all other sufferers the very best.

Evening RK. My post wasn’t supposed to be an implied criticism of you. I would have done exactly the same in your shoes. I am presuming that you are talking to KM as he appears to be naive in the extreme about what he can and can’t say. IR would never say these things.
I would also say that some of the information given to you is in a very grey area wrt inside information. I think that the tandyama news is non public, specific and price sensitive. But I am no lawyer.
God knows what you have been told that you can’t share or have to sanitise. You better hope that it’s made public before you want to do your next trade. I wouldn’t have mentioned that.
Still think the company is clueless about when and how to release information.

RK, I have enjoyed your posts today for which many thanks. However I do find it very odd that a main board listed stock should choose to feed the market useful information via a chat with one shareholder, who then can choose which information to relay to a small segment of the market. Just another example of their poor understanding of corporate governance and ethics. They could choose to do a live q&a run by a respected financial journalist, or broker, which would be a lot more democratic and open.
But apparently they prefer this method. Bizarre in the extreme. The clowns continue to run this circus imo.
As a fountain of knowledge RK, with lots of letters after your name, I presume you would agree that it’s not the way you would run a quoted company?

Zoros, It must be the grey shorts my postie, Dave wears…

Thanks RK. Could you ask them why they are following the mantra 'Under promise and under deliver'? Did KM learn that at Rios, and thought it better than NM's over promising and under delivering?

Very disappointed that BBG didnt ask me.