Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
50p sounds a bit optimistic.
If there is a takeover, it's going to be at a nice cheap price.
Well that was an honest answer Sands, but it does beg the question of why you post. I know rampers and derampers exist here and on all such boards, but there are others who have something meaningful to say, even if I don't always agree with them, or they with me.
My point was that it got out of hand last year and I believe some people were caught up in the euphoria. This isn't a black and white case and I think some of the talk here still needs to be questioned. When people here rejoice that a dissenting voice has been silenced it just makes me more inclined to question things.
Again, I never said decisions were based purely on what is, or was, posted here. If what you're saying is that nobody should take any notice of what is posted here, or include it in their decision making, then what's the point of the board?
We'll have to agree to differ on the proportion of your posts based on fact/guesswork/wishful thinking. You accuse me of negativity. I'd suggest there are a lot of people sitting on losses here, who might have made different decisions had the posts on this board been rather less optimistic and more balanced last year.
I said I bought my first shares at just over 16p, not the lot. I was simply responding to your implication that I was not a longer term investor.
I take it you're still marking this down for 50p in 2018.
And of course, many here were far less reluctant to talk about short term gains last year. It was not considered a sign of a lack of investing nouse then to make all sorts of predictions about the share price. Some short memories here.
FSJ. I''ve said it before, I find your attitude, which I would characterise as unquestioning, as puzzling as you find mine. I know what investing is; I bought my first HUM shares at a little over 16p, so I've been here a while.
The reasons you constantly reiterate for this being great are the same ones that cause me disquiet. I cannot argue that so much appears right, and yet .....
I don't propose to email HUM. If they were about to take a gigantic dump on us I doubt they would tell us in advance. That's where we differ fundamentally - as a rule of thumb I would take anything any company I'm invested in says with a pinch of salt. When a company is aware of misgivings amongst its shareholders and pulls down the shutters, my instinct is not to go to them for reassurance. A little proaction on HUM' s part would have been nice.
Of course, it may be. It's been like this longer than three months tho'.
I genuinely hope I'm wrong and we get shifting. I'd sooner have a quid a share, thanks, than 40p on a takeover or, worst case, a big fat zero. Fact is, the BOD could be doing a lot to reassure shareholders and they're choosing to do nothing. You can bet your Post Office account if the solids hit the airconditioning the BOD won't be suffering like we will.
I think it says something about a changing sentiment that your post has remained unanswered for so long. It seems to me that the behaviour of the share and of the BOD are simply becoming inexplicable.
A throwaway remark in an informal report from the AGM posted here was telling I thought, mentioning Dan's irritation at questions about the share price. There seems to be a view that we, as private investors, really should mind our own business. Well, the longer this goes on, the fishier it becomes. Frankly, I'm beginning to suspect we're having our collective leg pulled. Coupled with my unease about Dugbe, which I think is being given priority over a proven resourse for reasons unknown, I'm starting to smell a king size rat.
The results are going to change things, so the increasingly reticent cheerleaders say. Well, we'll see. If they don't, I'm inclined to step away. Candidly, the only thing that's keeping me here is the thought of a takeover, which I agree is probably our best outcome now. Otherwise, I think we're either in for an ego fuelled ride on the empire building train, with uncertainty and dilution, or for the revelation of another AIM scam.
All in all, I'm rather tired of being treated with contempt by the HUM board, not one of whom has risked their own money to the extent that I, and many other PI's, have done.
Tell me to sell, call me a ranter, but you know really that something stinks here and the BOD evidently don't give a damn about our position.
That's one way of looking at it ng. Personally I see it as an indicator of what HUM will have to face in Liberia. I simply don't think they can expect the same sort of relationship with the Liberian authorities that they have with those in Mali. I am a little sceptical that the main driver here is the welfare of the ordinary Liberian in the street.
Some comment by goldpanda on ADVFN to the effect that Weah' s refusal to sign off deal is driven by interest shown in the concession by another company.
I'm sorry, I've only just realised your question was asked of me.
Aside from the security incident, which incidentally I felt was clumsily handled, or more rather ignored, I'd say my concerns are:
* the acknowledged manipulation of the share price over some months. Denied by many on here for a long time, but self evident in my opinion. I do not believe this could have continued for so long without Hummingbird being complicit to some extent.
* the lack of really significant shareholdings by the HUM board. As others have said, the share price at present is not that meaningful to those at the helm. Their salaries go into the bank every month regardless.
*poor communication by HUM. Nothing much really coming out on a regular basis. I know some here take the view that less is more. I look at the share price and disagree.
* HUM's decision to sell a big tranche of shares to a selected buyer at a discount. It is my view that these were simply sold at a profit over the following weeks. This sort of action strengthens my view that HUM are in on the manipulation of the share price.
*Dugbe. Again, a complete clamming up when allegations are made in the Liberian press. It may be argued that the description of HUM as "bankrupt" is fanciful, but where is HUM's rebuttal? Similarly, the allegation in the press that a Liberian official has a 10% shareholding (whether in HUM itself or the Dugbe project) is completely ignored. If it's true, it's serious. It may well not be but we all know how unreliable the shareholder listings have been. Whatever the situation it needs to be addressed by HUM.
*Dugbe. I'm concerned this is a vanity project. Liberia has endured many years of war and political instability and IMO HUM would be better off selling Dugbe and concentrating on bringing in the resource surrounding Yanfolila. Maybe buying Cora. We have an inexperienced management team who, despite their best efforts, have not advanced the share price in line with expectations. Getting the right LOM and presence in Mali should be their priority in my view.
*Dugbe. Despite confidence here that the President's signing off of the deal was a formality, it turned out not to be so. And, despite, assurances here that we're looking at "details", there are in fact fundamental and important changes being proposed.
*Endeavour. The appointment to the board of a former senior manager at Endeavour rang alarm bells for me and others. Maybe HUM board members might fancy a seat at the big table? Personally, the way this company is being allowed to drift seems to me likely to result in a takeover, whether by accident or design.
Those are some of my concerns and I believe they are impacting on the share price. We all agree this share should be higher but good news really doesn't shift it. We're being told by the resident sages that the next results will be the game changer. I hope so, but I'm not holding my breath. There has been no shortage of similar predictions, none of which has co
You don't mind healthy debate, Lobon. That's a good one. None of you cheerleaders mind it do you, as
long as it's the sort of debate that doesn't veer from your view? And even you don't really believe I'm BT in disguise.
My only response to your post is that you flatter yourself if you think it added value (on here or ADVFN).
You posted here yesterday morning to a tumbleweed response.
Well you've done it - all the dissenters got rid of. Two posts this weekend - dull isn't it? Could it be it was only an inability to deal with an opposing opinion that kept the cheerleaders believing their own rhetoric?
I'm going to stop posting on this board for a bit, which will no doubt please a lot of people. I'm tired of the patronising and smug attitude of a number of posters here but, I have to say it, FSJ in particular. Really, all you have is a contact at the company and a propensity to swallow what they tell you whole. Presumably you are flattered but you've become carried away with it, and are now just a convenient company mouthpiece. Calling people sunshine, using capitals to put your shouty point across, and giving Hummingbird a complete letout by forgetting in your "excitement" to ask about the security incident RNS, just show a rather childish tendency to wish fulfilment. Because the company tell you something does not make it a fact (or FACT as you'd say). You've allowed yourself to be bought (not literally but by flattery) and your opinions have become so one-sided as to be worthless. The company should have made some official announcement about the security incident in my opinion. The fact that they apparently have something to say to you about it, but don't feel they should share that officially, simply says to me that they are happy to sweep things under the carpet. You are not part of the company but they seem to regard you as a way of getting their message out without doing anything for which they are accountable. It's too much, and I feel I have to stand up and be counted. I'm certain of the reaction from your following but there is another view. NG accused me the other day of being a glass half full person. I think that is to be naive - the saying is about seeing the best in a situation or seeing the worst. I've got a biggish amount of money (for me) tied up in this share and I'm not going to base my decisions on being positive or negative for the sake of it. I'll listen to anyone's contribution and I won't filter posters. What's the point if you genuinely want to understand what's going on? The movers and shakers here simply want to close down any view other than their own.
Am I reading that wrong FSJ? You seem to be telling NomZ he should be embarrassed, then agreeing with him.
Flexible it is then, but the people here who assure us all will be well won't give us our money back if this goes mammaries skyward. They really have no more idea than anybody else. That includes me, so I'll make my own judgements regardless of how much people shout.
I said one way. Why would that mean just up or down in terms of SP? Doesn't that discount a takeover as a possible event, hitherto dismissed as unthinkable? The received wisdom by the shouters down here is that Hummingbird will go from strength to strength as an independent entity, with LOM extended and jam aplenty at some point. That's the one way I meant specifically. My actual point is, dismissing people in an abusive way because they take a view that you don't share is not something I admire. You've been on this board long enough to have experienced all the forecasts made here (some of them very specific) which came to nothing. The idea of the price being manipulated was shouted down here, with the usual insults, but now we're pretty much agreed the MM's are pulling the strings to their own advantage. Now we're told it's just the way things are, which is true, but it didn't stop it being dismissed. People on this board have shifted the goalposts time and again. If there's a takeover, rest assured they'll have seen it coming. Think for yourself - that's all BT is doing. If somebody tells you something has to be true because Hummingbird told them, a spoonful of Saxa might be in order. They'll tell us what they want to, but as far as I'm aware they're not obliged to tell us what they don't want us to know unless the regulations require it. I still hope for big things from this share but the fundamentals, which have been right for a long time it would seem, are not shifting the share price. If you don't think that's relevant to your investment strategy that's your business. It features in mine quite strongly. And remember, there were a lot of people on this board who predicted with the same certainty we see now that this would be at 60p last Christmas, and that was one of the more conservative esimates. I'll say it again, an assertion, however strongly put, doesn't make something a fact. The AGM is not far away and I'm looking forward to what is said then. Perhaps we'll all be more enlightened at that time.