Member Info for notrader

Aquakidder - "mid price 20p being the expected agreed price" Agreed by whom. and for what?

Paddy - can't argue about a single thing you posted. Your thoughts are almost exactly the same as mine. Spooky to read it!

And Avo, have a look at yesterdays SP, the closing SP. Can you tell us how much we are down today?

Aquakidder - "I’m afraid there’s a lot of ignorance on this site" then you go on to say you haven't a clue. Lol

Avo - " down every day" If that were true, how come we're at about the same SP as a month ago, and there lave been lows inbetween?

Bagpu55 - why don't you give us your opinion first? Perhaps give them some ideas.

Much prefer your approach Josh, although I think there is little chance of NCM not completing. Independent assessment does not help GGP, merely delaying the entire project. Whatever the outcome of the 5% deal, it cannot do GGP any harm. If the price is lower than the 'market' expects, it might inspire an attack on the SP. However, I consider it just another positive tick on the checklist for moving to production. Traders might want delay so they can exploit the uncertainty, but to the company it's undesirable.

CJM - "But as far as I can see not in GGP in any meaningful way."

Perhaps you could elucidate(!) how far you have looked.

Zoros - all good questions that any investor should consider. As to your Q1 - what about Northern Star Resources Limited?

Steve Todoruk and Willem Middlekoop would benefit greatly from an early monetisation of their investment in GGP. Not unexpected that they would promote the idea. How about you?

Hydro - "What... are no opinions are not allowed now..?" (sic)

Forgive my temerity in daring to disagree with you. It's my opinion.

Zoros - perfect sense to me. I think NCM might want 100% of Hav, but they already have 75%, so the question is what difference would the rest make to their bottom line compared to what it would cost up front (and including full capex). Sandeep wants to monetise assets, not outlay cash. Hydro said they would by all GGP. I don't see that happening - I don't think they would have any use for GGP's non Paterson assets, nor want to be fully responsible for exploring them, or our other Paterson tenements. It's not what they do. I think it's more likely that they would continue to work with GGP in JVs or otherwise for the bits that interest them.

Hydro sounded pretty certain: "GGP will be long gone, and fully bought out on a 100% basis well before Dividends sadly (whatever anyone says on here, that's the reality)"

Not surer where all this 'certainty' that GGP will be subject to takover is coming from. SD clearly set out his vision to establish short-term a firm financial base and medium term continue to grow the company to become a producer. Seems strange for so-called supporters of GGP to promote this idea. The only ones to benefit would be those looking to get their hands on cash returns more quickly, rather than being part of successful company.

Good points, Canary. To me SD was neutral when to 20mt was put to him, neither accepting or rejecting. What was interesting to me was his use of the word 'compromise', and his repeated focus on creating a firm base to progress to future stages, and the available options for funding. He is a money man, and they generally don't like uncertainty. CEOs dislike not having full knowledge of the options available so they can make the best strategic plans for their company. I certainly feel he wouldn't have chosen to be in the position he is at this particular stage of development, but that he will make the best of it. He seems keen to get an early negotiated deal, mentioning the 'wide range of outcomes' possible from the Valmin process.

When a CEO uses the word 'compromise' I consider them to be warning that decisions to be made might not be the optimum, bur the best available. It could be a warning not to be too enthusiastic about the 5% settlement. He referred to NCM being on a fast-track, and he obviously sees running with them as key to his long-term strategy. He might be willing to accept a lower than perfect settlement to maintain project momentum. He seems unconcerned about long-term funding, and has expressed confidence in alternative funding should it be needed to fill any gaps.

For those new to the board who might not be aware, this poster is a serial deramper who has been trying to trash-talk this share for weeks. His latest spiel is to claim that the 5% settlement will be very low and the SP will tank, all without any evidence. Don't be taken in , just check his posting history.

"Because brokers TP accounts for predicted rise following imminent news (MRE2 & FMV)"

I think that statement indicates that either you have no idea how the market works, or that you are a troll trying to peddle a spurious argument.

Alba -"I just assumed brokers predictions reflect market expectations" If that was true, then why is the SP at least 10p below 'market expectations'?

There can be no doubt that, whatever NCM pay for the 5%, the revenue they will make from it in future years will be massive in comparison. Just as the revenue they get from their current 70% will be massive in comparison to the expenditure used to obtain it within the JV. But we only know that with the benefit of hindsight. Nobody knew when the JV started what the true potential was, and without Newcrest taking the risk of being involved, GGP wouldn't be on the brink of becoming a gold producer.

So Alba has 5,000 tons of spoil. Average content (being generous) 5g/ton. That should provide (being generous) 25,000g of Au. Worth about $45m. Wow, big money. Except there are 4.6b shares in issue, giving an average of $.007 per share.

Don't think I'll bother.