Member Info for MF11

"Nobody was forced to sell at £2.30 ... it was a buying opportunity ... silly to sell then"

You also have to remember it is not only Private Investors involved and not only them that may sell. Different Institutions will have both rules and clients they need to protect. Some will be obliged to SELL on large drops in the SP

@DaffyPicker - Yes normal market mechanics as Sageman would have you believe.

Nothing to see here.

We may be 82% up since the lows of the Macquarie note, but the SP is still not keeping up with its peers.

Since Greatland listed on the ASX, the SP has increased by approximately 35%, the average for other GDXJ constituents (that were in the GDXJ Fund at that time is plus 61%). So we are not even keeping pace with other juniors.

We were undervalued when we were listed on the ASX, we are even more undervalued now, and that is without even considering the impact of the imminent:

FS Study

Telfer Resource Upgrade

Drill Results

Addition to the GDX

......

and that's not even considering the 23 Million plus shorts that need to close.

Now what are some of them Broker Share Price predictions?

@ProjectKiller69 - Don't diss "The Rocket Man" - he's the top poster on LSE.

@Pj70 - "Hi - could someone explain to me that there appears to be more sells than buys in trades but the price is moving up. How does that work?"

To expand on what James is saying.

Unfortunately in our current data rich age following the technical advancements of the previous few decades, the powers that be, do not appear to make the data publicly available as to whether each trade is a buy or a sell. We / most computer systems are currently reliant on guesswork to try to determine this.

If a trade is above mid point of the "Bid" and "Offer" price it is considered a "Buy", it is below a "Sell".

As you should be aware it is possible to "Buy" below the mid-point or "Sell" above this mid-point.

Thus making the buy/sell data on sites such as LSE pretty much worthless.

Sorry @Howard249 - but one is an article and the other is the source data from the official ASIC site.

Go to the correct place, you will get the correct / most up to date data.

@Howard249 - It is all publicly available data that is being reported. You just have to do a bit of digging.

https://download.asic.gov.au/short-selling/RR20250930-001-SSDailyAggShortPos.pdf

@Wolves90 - re manipulation.

If you haven't read the numerous posts highlighting the number of shares (currently 3.60%) of total stock in issue being out on loan/short

And the continuous sell down/ deployment of these shorts in order to suppress the share price.

Then I'm afraid I cannot help you.

Thanks @TimberTrader

With regards to your question: "Are the VanEck numbers correct and up to date?"

The latest update, from around 11:00 today, suggests that all of their GDXJ holding (15,393,381 shares) has now been transferred to the ASX, i.e. they no longer appear to have any AIM CDIs in their US quote.

With regards to accuracy, the underlying Market Vector index it is supposed to track, states that the current weighting should be 0.91%, according to their website, VanEck currently own 0.89%. so they are still a few shares light.

I note that VanEck acquired an additional 1,786,181 shares during the GDXJ rebalance last Friday. This has increased our weighting in the US Quote to 0.84%

I'm still not sure if they hold the correct amount as I don't have access to my reconciliation spreadsheet, but it should not be far off. That said my initial thoughts are that they are still slightly underweight.

As previously stated, the increase in weight was due to the correction of our Free float percentage, following the reduction of Newmont's holdings a couple of months ago.

As per Market Vector announcement made on the 5th September, we were not added to the GDX. Hopefully that will happen during the December Review.

@kevin0541 - What the link you posted showed, was an example as of 3rd June 2025, if VanEck were to transition the GDX from the NYSE Arca Gold Miners Index to the MVGDX MarketVector™ Global Gold Miners Index, then the expected changes would be as per the link.

Given that this transition is not taking place until the 19th September, then that list is only hypothetical of what would have happened if they transitioned on the 3rd of June and NOT what will happen during this quarters rebalance.

However, given that the comparison / analysis provided by VanEck was from the 3rd June (before GGP were listed on the ASX, it is not surprising GGP did not exist in the list). Additionally the fact that ARTEMIS GOLD INC already exists in the MarketVector™ Global Gold Miners Index then in all likelihood when VanEck change the source of their underlying index to this MarketVector™ Global Gold Miners Index ARTEMIS GOLD INC will be added to the GDX.

Given that the rebalance in not announced until this Friday 12th September and the transition to the Market Vector index does not happen until the 19th September, there is currently no way of knowing if Greatland will be added to the GDX during this quarters update or not. Personally I suspect it will.

Sorry Spade but for the Passively managed funds it is mandatory. They are designed and contracted to accurately track the underlying indexes.

Wow there are some uninformed rubbish being posted on here.

Many funds are passively managed, and by design, these funds are mandated to replicate the index composition—not to make discretionary decisions.

Passive funds, including ETFs and index-tracking superannuation products, are structured to mirror the index holdings and weightings exactly. When a stock is added to the ASX 200 or ASX 300, these funds are contractually required to purchase it to ensure alignment. Thus the buying is pretty much compulsory.

Australian ETFs alone have seen rapid growth. By end‑September 2024, the total Australian ETF industry reached A$226.6 billion, a nearly 50% increase year-on-year, driven largely by inflows into these passive funds.

In Australia, the shift is evident: a large portion of inflows continues moving into low-cost passive ETFs, largely from providers like Vanguard, iShares, and BetaShares.

By contrast, actively managed funds have discretion and may opt not to buy new index constituents.

Simplified Explanation:

Passive funds ARE mandated to buy newly added stocks to indices like the ASX 200—this is about index tracking accuracy, not regulation.

Active funds are not obligated to buy; they make decisions based on strategy.

Given the large scale of passive fund AUM, their required buying can create significant real demand around inclusion dates.

It should be exactly the same for both the GDXJ and GDX, they are passively managed and VanEck should be contractually obliged to accurately track the underlying Funds.

@Zoros - "an Eck (ETF) now buying to add to its existing holding of GGP. Is this the start.........do they know something?"

Yes they do. They know that people are finally starting to invest into the GDXJ on quite a large basis.

Thus they have to acquire quite a large number of shares for ALL constituents held within the index. Hence the increase in their holding of GGP and ALL OTHER constituents in the GDXJ.

I just wish people would understand the topics they post about.

Https://www.der.wa.gov.au/images/documents/our-work/licences-and-works-approvals/Decisions_/L6079/L6079%20%2025-08-2025%20AR.pdf

Summary of Licence Amendment – Key Points

Licence Holder: Greatland Pty Ltd

Site: Telfer Gold Mine, Pilbara region, WA

Licence Number: L6079/1988/14

Date of Amendment: 25 August 2025

Reason: Approval of operational changes and expansion works

Outcome: Licence amended following environmental and health risk assessment

🔧 Approved Amendments

Tailings Storage Facility (TSF 8): Construction of Stage 3 and 4 raises

Dewatering (Category 6): Increased capacity to manage higher volumes pumped to Pit 13

Crushing (Category 12): Addition of a mobile crushing plant within the Southern Waste Rock Dump

Landfill (Category 63): Expansion of areas for tyre disposal and inert waste

🏗️ Existing Operations Summary

Mining: One open pit (West Dome) + one underground mine

Processing includes:

Crushing → SAG mill → ball mill

Gravity gold recovery + flotation

Cyanide leaching and gold recovery using carbon

Copper and cyanide recovery from tailings

Tailings thickening and disposal via TSF 8

Tailings transport: Slurry pipeline network around TSF 8 perimeter

Water return: Decant water pumped back to processing plant for reuse

🧱 TSF 8 – Stage 3 & 4 Raises

Construction method: Downstream raising (safer and stable)

Design updates:

Wider benches at crest levels to allow operations and construction at the same time

No change to tailings delivery or water return systems

Existing infrastructure will be relocated as raises progress

🧩 Embankment Structure

Zone 2B: Compacted, low-permeability clay/silt liner to prevent seepage

Zone 4B: Rockfill layer for support and mass stability

1-metre “step-in” at Stage 3 toe to maintain liner thickness

Access constraint: Tailings pipe area reduced to 3.0–3.5 m during Stage 3 works

🌱 Environmental & Risk Considerations

Risks to the environment and public health assessed

Department determined impacts are manageable

Amendment granted with standard conditions applied

@96dc2 - With the price difference, could traders not buy on the ASX and dump the shares on the lse?

Traders cannot directly buy on the ASX and then “dump” the shares on the LSE (AIM) because the shares on the ASX are fully registered securities, while the instruments on the LSE (AIM) are CDIs (CHESS Depositary Interests), which are not the same thing — and transferring between the two markets requires a formal conversion process.

@Chellybaby - "Perhaps those with deep pockets have had their fill"

Well the shorts in Australia and the UK are still open, and the Short Selling in Aus over the past couple of days appears to have increased.

So I suggest not.

Personally I'd take any data from Morningstar with a huge pinch of salt at the moment. They appear to be mixing pre-consolidated share holding amounts with post consolidation holding amounts.

This makes the data pretty worthless at the moment.

The Australian Financial Review’s Street Talk column reported that the Australian Securities and Investments Commission had been asking questions about what the company and its advisers knew at the time of the float.

Taking questions from media at Diggers and Dealers on Tuesday about whether ASIC had spoken to the Greatland, Mr Day said:“We weren’t contacted to comment on that. If we had been, we would have said no.”

An ASIC spokeswoman declined to comment when asked by The West Australian there had been any kind of engagement with Greatland.

https://thewest.com.au/business/mining/diggers-dealers-2026-greatland-gold-boss-shaun-day-denies-talking-disclosures-with-asic--c-19584727

As highlighted frequently by Bamps21, there is potentially still a large amount of ore to be uncovered at Telfer, and having just watched Shaun's Diggers & Dealers presentation, that appeared to be the key focus / point he was trying to get across. That Telfer itself could still be providing us ore for years and potentially decades s to come - pointing to the fact that the Main Dome underground had been producing for 25 year plus, and that the West Dome Deeps were to be fully explored.

As suggested by Bamps the presentation pointed to numerous potential growth areas. Hence the largest growth drilling project in Telfer's history.

Was Shaun right to focus on this in his D&D presentation, too right he was. The market made it's decision on the quarterlies (or those that can impact the market did). Havieron will come into focus when the feasibility study comes out in the Dec quarter. Telfer is the here and now and he needed to get this across.

A huge drilling campaign will come at a cost, but with it may come rich rewards. I for one can't wait for future resource upgrades from Telfer.

https://mining.com.au/diggers-greatland-embarks-on-telfers-greatest-drill-campaign/