RE: per ardua ad astra7 Sep 2018 10:55
Good morning, potashman. I’ll start by starting that of course I’m disappointed. I’m disappointed for few reasons, tbh. Firstly, as no doubt you will have gathered, I’m disappointed that there is the potential for further dilution (though am cognisant other options are available and hope they can be explored fully). Secondly I’m disappointed that the MTS could have been signed off at the DFS stage when it would appear the design is insufficient to meet our needs, and it does beg the question ‘are there any other miscalculations?’ - in saying that though, I do note as Lookingatgoats postulated earlier, there may be an element of over engineering by the STRABAG to ensure they’re not left on the hook. Fingers crossed on that. And thirdly, I’m disappointed by the negative bearing this will now have on the way some people perceive the company and its reputation going forward.
Notwithstanding all that, from a development perspective much of the project has now been significantly derisked and there is much to be taken from that. And as the shock/pain/frustration of yesterday’s news recedes, hopefully more people will come to appreciate that. Of course the market dislikes ambiguity intensely and we now face a few more months of it as we await the final ST2 announcement. But if anything, if anyone was in any doubt yesterday’s news really should underline to anyone who may have thought otherwise, this mine will get built. It should be crystal clear Chris Fraser will do whatever it takes to ensure that. And if you really are a LTH as so many here profess to be, somewhat perversely there is some comfort to be found there.
Regards,
per ardua ad astra
Sign In
Follow the stocks
