Member Info for lootgaloot

Institutional investors are fully behind onboarding this activist investor so it doesn't really matter how PIs vote. The seismic significance of this new investor has clearly been lost on many of the posters here. This is a clear endorsement of Molefe and ensures management accountability. I can see big changes ahead.

And this is why we need an activist shareholder to hold management to account. I will grit my teeth and vote Yes. I'll gladly take the dilution.

You assume LWP and Roan have value. There is no evidence of that to date.

i’m going to repost the link by @bottomsup from yesterday because i believe audley capital’s role as ‘activist investor’ has gone underappreciated. if indeed audley are the unnamed investor.

https://thehedgefundjournal.com/audley-capital-advisors/

until now, jlp institutional shareholders have been passive. understandable in situations where management are doing an adequate job; but that has not been the case with jlp for some time. generally, management are not welcoming of ‘activist’ investors. it normally spells the beginning of the end or, at the very least, a shake up of the old ways.

in the linked article, julian treger is keen to present a less gung-ho approach than his early career, but a leopard doesn’t change its spots and i’m sure this leopard won’t be a ***** cat should leon coetzer disappoint again.

it’s all smiles for now, coetzer has little option but to put on a brave face. but the introduction of an activist investor comes hot on the heels of his failed attempt to issue yet more shares. initially i thought coetzer, in an act of desperation, had found a random investor via the back door. now i believe it is in fact slater, and other large investors, who invited audley capital onboard. i found the following excerpt from the article interesting:

“an important part of audley’s process is to consult with large institutional shareholders in a company ahead of investing. in some cases, this may extend to determining whether those shareholders would be willing to work with audley on corporate changes or some form of restructuring, including putting the company up for sale.”

i realise that further dilution will be a bitter pill for some long-suffering posters on here, but i genuinely believe there is something deeper going on. i’m not saying leon coetzer is clearing his desk as we speak, but if you want real change then a yes vote could be our opportunity to get just that.

Strange that some see this as Leon holding a gun to shareholders head. Actually, I see it more like Leon holding a gun to his own head. This attempt at raising more cash is the act of a desperate man. A man who knows he is years from breakeven and can only get there by significant upfront costs. What would a desperate man do in such a situation. He's tried to raise more cash and was refused. He is now insulting the very institutions who voted against by going behind their backs in cahoots with a new investor. LC is a man who is running out of road very fast so he's gone for the nuclear option. He is purposely gambling what little credibility he has left in the hope that existing investors blink first. Before now he had manoeuvred himself into the position of "I am the company and the company is me". Many industry experts like Ricus left because they couldn't work with him. When all is lost a desperate man will hold a gun to his head and say id I go the company goes. So who will blink first? It's a sad truth that LC is actually correct. The company desperately needs a further cash injection to survive. But is he the man to spend that cash?

Shareholders already recently voted against dilution and now LC tries again by the back door. It will be interesting to see the outcome.

If the motion passes then I assume LC can justify the merits to previously unconvinced institutional investors. That would be a strong buy signal for me.

However, if the motion fails then this must be the last throw of the dice from a desperate gambler. LC position is surely untenable. A board that has lost the confidence of the market to raise funds is not fit to run a publicly quoted company. I see little alternative other than institutional investors finally losing patience and getting rid of this clown at the next AGM.

I think I've missed the boat here. It was tipped at 21p a couple of months ago and it looked interesting. I decided to hold back and watch for a while. Missed out on a quick 30% profit. I'm not sure how much further this has to go.

Another tizzy.

How many times has the copper price been posted on here accompanied by 'smiley face' and rocket emojis and yet no mention of inflationary processing costs. And yet a single post from NTGU regarding processing costs at a time of sulphuric acid shortages and @Frogboy goes into a tizzy. You want balanced posts? NTGU is giving you balanced posts.

AJP08 explanation seems the most likely; poor turn out due to lack of announcement. One of the few legal means of adjourning an AGM is insufficient quorum. Now in my opinion the company should quickly release a brief statement to that effect.

Sorry, I misunderstood. Still very strange but pointless speculating. A month is a long time to wait for clarity. Hopefully ITX communicate the reason soon before posters fill the void with their own theories.

So John/Laura told AJP08 that an RNS wasn't released for AGM due to a mistake? Well that now appears to be not very truthful?

Good to hear Damers. I believe a recorded version will be available. I'll catch up this evening. Some of us still have to work for a living.

@kalan is a legend! Went 100% cash before Iran war. Sold his daughters shares to muggins for 3.45p. Called the support at 2.8p while pearl clutchers like @SeisNav was wetting his pants. Now the crafty grandad is building back his position at a discount.

Unfortunately I'll be at work tomorrow and can't see the live presentation. Hopefully a recorded version is made available after the event. Nevertheless, I've registered and submitted the following two questions:

The July 2023 report entitled “Initial pit optimisation delivers A$28m NPV for Big One” was well received. Are there plans to release similar reports as the NWQ Copper Project evolves? Ideally to incorporate the extended ‘Big One’ and satellite prospects at key stages of development with discounted NPV for the full lifetime of the resource.

Given that inaugural scout drilling at Harts Range failed to intersect significant Rare Earth grades, are you still confident the pegmatites contain HREE mineralisation? There appears to be very little evidence to support your current model other than a theoretical assumption that low K/Rb ratios and elevated yttrium are good geochemical indicators. To what extent have you had to reassess your initial modelling?

I'd be surprised if there are immediate plans to re-visit Harts Range. Its going to take more than a 1 meter Tungsten intercept. Still, it will be interesting to see if there are plans for 2027/2028.

My guess is the presentation will focus on Copper at NWQ with a bit on REE at Pomme.

Joel Logan tweeted he is on-site at NWQ with Austral Resources https://x.com/NewFrontierMin/status/2053627163526750435

So maybe some meat on the bones of the Austral partnership. Drilling plans for extending Big One and intentions regarding satellite prospects (likely Mt Storm).

IMO they need to JORC about five or six Big One equivalents to justify a 1p share price (could take several years). Otherwise results from Pomme to justify > 1.5p.

From ChatGPT:

Under the UK Companies Act 2006, you generally need to own, or collaborate with others to own, at least 5% of the total voting rights of all shares entitled to vote at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) to propose a resolution.

@lootgaloot 750K

An update on sulphuric acid supply.

Another 4.35% today. 20% since the tip last month. I've checked and it goes ex-dividend in a couple of days time so I assume it will fall back a little. Looks a promising stock but worth waiting until it goes ex-dividend. I'll do a little research over the coming weeks as it may be worth building a position.