Member Info for JerseyCrew

Or she... etc - with apologies!

Unless he is a neighbour.....

Hey Mickey ! All good?

If you are sitting on a coiled spring it can be very uncomfortable.

ATB

Helps is I share the link!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YB9AvZu9hk8

enjoy

lets face it, we (ggp) are nothing without gold having a value and whilst the details of how hav will be mined and by whom are yet to be revealed we can take a step back and look at the case for gold and gold miners in general. many here will be aware of daniela cambone and her interviews - i'm a big fan and introduces me to really interesting insights and characters. this is a particularly good interview in my view. ****** is a smart (billionaire) cookie and he expands on several gold themes and gold miners as well as investor behaviour which we commonly call herd mentality.

he has a particular interest in novagold but given his messages about jurisdictions you can substitute ggp into the box in my view.

worth a listen in my view on your commute today.

atb

For context and in respect of your comment about news being received quietly.

As I post up 19% on the day.

If it keeps close to this level at this stage of the game I would call that a result personally and close to the 6 month high.

And just for context - when I started this GGP journey gold was circa 1200 USD/Oz .....

I suspect that 98% or more of the posters here (including myself) have largely cut their exploration shareholding teeth with GGP and some of us will have lived the Lassonde Curve rollercoaster with lots of kicking oneself for not getting out on the top of the first wave.

Well for those that are still here, you have hung in this long - it would be a shame to lose heart at this stage in the game.

Keep the faith.

ATB

I like COBR and think it has huge potential and so does the market given the price movement on opening. When the CEO mentions the word sensational you have to take notice and make the effort of trying to understand more about the project.

Talk about further large % increases today ..... well think carefully about those claims.

Reference to other stock rises - I think that that is probably a good thing - not because I am saying COBR will replicate or not replicate but because they do provide good learning lessons on the correlation between SP movement and the exploration life cycle and funding requirements towards potential monetisation of the resource asset.

FOMO should be avoided - this has a way to go. Just look at the other exploration companies that have swung in and out of vogue (and will probably continue to do so).

Above all else work with long time frames in mind and shorter term rewards will be a bonus.

I look forward to the continuing evolving story here - sounds like the next news flow is relatively near term for an explorer.

ATB

Thanks for sharing - gives a balanced view - a must watch.

Great post Zan - thought provoking

Final paragraph spot on - hopefully not too long to find out!

Not pontificating (hopefully) - more reflecting

Thanks Zan

Great logical post as always - good discussion points

I had completely forgotten that the interview was around the time of the suspension. I do remember thinking that the explanations given at the time were plausible but still struggling to remember the Vim comment - which is a pity - it might have sustained me better over recent months!

Not sure whether rolr in your second sentence was it a typo or if it is an acronym I have not encountered?

Can we have evidence of RM setting targets that he knows can't be achieved? - I certainly think that the targets have been overly aspirational in hindsight. Was the presentation (thanks - I was looking in the RNSs initially) untrue at the time? I'm personally not sure we can state that as fact. Overly optimistic - looking back yes

I think you are referencing p23 for the timeline and as you say all the milestones require financing but at the very start of the timeline it is clear that the financing itself is the prerequisite. So given there are no time lines for individual components of the plan but an obvious end date - did Robbie know at the time of writing the presentation that the funding would be so protracted? Dealing with a third party and a large sum involved - how much he is controlling the timeline here or the conditions? We were given hints in tweets about on site consultants so clearly in-depth due diligence which also costs (normally borne by the company - not financier) - I think in hindsight maybe there should have been some more formal RNS statements about progress and conditions but then again, would that have been appropriate during sensitive funding negotiations? Great for us to know - but is that great for the company or even allowed by the financier? Unknown.

In terms of the accounts - this is an interesting one. We know this is a cash strapped company juggling priorities - what is the right thing to do? Announce to the world that it's struggling to afford the required team of accountants months before? They did that and went into suspension with prior notice to the shareholders as we know and therefore the question is moreover in my view is when should that announcement have been made. What we don't know is what else was happening at the time regarding production and cashflow in the background and what the potential impact might have been on the creditors terms - in business confidence in the supply chain is everything and 90 day terms can turn to COD very quickly and can potentially bring a company down. Also what impact on finance discussions?

GCAT is a PLC though and expectations are rightly high for the need for transparency. The question I keep coming back to in my mind is whether we would still have an operating company if all issues were made public all the time and where the line is drawn? Arguments can be made for and against - hindsight is wonderful. The good thing is that the company is still operating.

Not ramping or making excuses here. Pontificating

Haha sw1000.

Totally valid point!

As we wait I will try and make sure that if posters are posting accounting information that they quote numbers correctly.

Itsyou

Are we in a playground now?

OK - I'll play - you have given the GL - I'm not giving it back.

Let me see if I can help you marshal your own thoughts -given you know a lot and mean a lot...

Try starting with the opening statement:

The interim consolidated financial statement for Caracal Gold PLC as at 21/12/22 included a total liability position of £15.537M.

Now take it from there - expand upon and make your point or points. If you chose to use financial ratios such as Market Capitalisation divided by Total Liabilities perhaps you could give some explanation behind the relevance.

Itsyou

I replied to your post because you were misquoting the Current Liability number. Simple.

You ask why bother to reply and that the correct figure was £5M short of the (incorrect) number you used. Really?

You then follow up with this statement:

The company has massive liabilities of £15.5m, which is bad in a high interest environment, especially on the interest rate they are being charged...fact

So you have taken an incorrect number and then inferred that the company is paying interest on this amount.

Why did I respond to your factually incorrect post? Because it was factually incorrect and presented a false accounting position for the company for anyone reading this board who didn't understand the true position.

I present facts to you and you ignore them.

I ask simple questions and you refuse to answer them.

You say 'I know a lot and I mean a lot'. Just what does that mean??

To cap it off you now say that you are not invested here. Unbelievable. Simply unbelievable.

(cont)

I am sure many will read my post and just see a one sided view - I understand why that might be but my intention was to play devils advocate.

From my experience things are rarely black and white and particularly in business. Financial accounts can tell you so much but for context nothing beats walking a factory floor - looking at the stock room, looking at the machinery, talking to staff, understanding the components of a cashflow forecast - looking at the make of of the creditor and debtor lists, understanding the broader supply and demand issues to get a good feeling for a business. Of course we don't have that luxury as shareholders - we only get to read an RNS and if we are looking we get some colour and explanation from interviews.

In short I try and read between the lines as well as the factual content supplied. I was raised in a family where money came in from a one man business and have pretty good understanding how money is hard earned from the efforts of one person performing all the duties of any business - its hard - very hard.

I'm not putting my rose tinted glasses on when I look at Robbie or the company - I see it for what it is - currently an under capitalised company operating in a very tough market but literally sitting on a gold mine with huge potential. High risk / reward stuff.

I try and take a balanced view and clearly you do as well Zan.

ATB

Hi Zan

Thanks for the post last night.

I did dial in once to a TG interview (not on their group anymore) but I can't recall most of the content now frankly or the context in which any numbers were given. You are right though - that is a big number. I would need to read a transcript if anyone has it to understand how and why this was mentioned to form a personal view. If it was heavily caveated as it seems from your post, it does sound like he was dreaming out loud and hopefully anyone listening would have seen it as such - but this is where communication is such a complex issue and particularly for CEOs where they have to be so careful. It might well fall into the category of things Robbie later regretted saying, even if at the time he was trying to share some personal long term view of potential. As an aside lets hope he was right!!

In terms of the April presentation - I found an RNS quoting Robbie:

The results from the first 30 days of mining and processing ore from the Kilimapesa Hill high-grade zone have gone beyond expectations and the team are continuing to improve in all the areas. The high-grade zone now supports the current production levels for 13 months, plant availability is back on track and improving after the installation of standby power and recoveries are expected to improve with the delivery and commissioning of the new crusher and additional CIL tank capacity.

Is this what you are referencing? I am not sure that they needed the finance deal to meet those output forecasts as they were concentrating on the HGZ - could be wrong?

If so if that was the situation at that time I am not sure I can see an issue with that. Have I missed something?

To your point about transparency I think it would very much be dependent on whether he was making false forward looking statements or not. I doubt he would have fallen into such a trap as if that was proven the FCA would probably remove his ability to be a director. From my business experience, forecasts are just that - forecasts - so many investors will beat companies up because a forecast was not met, without understanding the reasons why. Mining is a good example of an industry where there can be lots of unforeseen eventualities and in the case of Caracal with so little working capital behind them, its almost a case of be damned if you do and damned if you don't provide a forecast - with old plant being worked hard and potential long lead in times for replacement or repair, it must be an incredibly difficult thing to forecast with total confidence. Probably the best guesstimate at the time frankly.

In terms of the accounts - yes obviously a biggie and with serious consequences. I think before passing judgement we would need to sit in the CEO' shoes and understand the cashflow juggling act - do you throw cash at an accounting function or production - annoy shareholders in the short term (suspension) or have quick and uptodate numbers on the closing statement? (cont)

Itsyou.

My heart sank when I read your first sentence regarding my questions which you state did not need reply.

These were really simple and basic questions and your only reply is to say they don't need a reply. The most blatant deflection statement. When you come up with financial ratios that I have never come across such as total liabilities in a balance sheet as a multiple of market capitalisation - can anyone reading this explain that one to me please?

You ask why I didn't include the financial status of the company and yet I have already pointed out the second point I made in my list of considerations - quote:

- read and try to understand the forthcoming accounts

I have tried to explain that this bullet point is a common generic term to understand the overall financial status - BS and P&L - how plain can I be?

You state the company owes £15.5M and that you are fully aware of how the £15.5M is made up of - emphasised with the word (please) as if to emphasise how basic the point is that you are making. I have tried to guide you to help you understand - let me try one last time - I strongly suggest you brush up on the constituent parts of the balance sheet and understand the difference between current liabilities and non current liabilities and indeed what elements will be interest bearing and which are not. Think about hidden assets also in a miners balance sheet.

You then actually start to raise some interesting points and questions that we are all looking for answers for - let me remind you of my 3rd point to look out for: quote

- read and try and understand the forthcoming prospectus

Absolutely no one here is trying to deflect from any numbers - I am shouting from the roof tops to look out for this very detail. That is what all the holders here want - to get to the bottom of all the numbers.

Once we understand where we have been (remember these will all be historic numbers) we can have a better idea along with the prospectus and hopefully more uptodate / quarterly / management number and overlay all of this against the future plan, whatever that might be.

In terms of trying to discredit you - you seriously need to reread again all of my posts.

I have corrected your incorrect statements on Current Liabilities. I have questioned a financial ratio which you are quoting and which I have not encountered - I haven't passed comment - I just want it explaining further please. You have made statements that you have taught me basics of mining - I can't find evidence in your posts to justify that claim.

I'm afraid in my personal view, you have discredited yourself and that is a shame.

I would encourage you to look at my list again and please try and understand the generic terms I have used in some cases which are standard in business accounting and then try and find some bias statements or suggestions in there to justify your claim of representing a one sided view.

Reminds me of the old joke about the chap being chased around in his garden swimming pool by an alligator - he forgets that he only went in there to clean it! Feels like that sometimes on this board!!