Member Info for rustybucket

I can not see them de-listing from London, they have a FTSE 250 listing with the potential to gatecrash the FTSE 100 at a later date.

Please deal with facts, NOTHING, has been mention about any de-listing, If it was taken over and someone wanted to de-list fine, but these people are not even on the board yet.

Its nearly as ridiculous as saying what happens if gold goes to $3000, all hypothetical. And Everest and UGC might have had an alliance to oust the BOD and Pavel, who says they will agree with other things going forward.

Lest get a new complete BOD, a CEO, and Auditor. Then we might start to see light. At the moment no reason why they should not be making good profits.

I can't see shareholders accepting a low ball offer. Its one thing voting off a board and asking for an investigation into past dealings, its a totally different ball game trying to buy a company when there are people with large holdings who would be very opposed to such a deal.

They would also need board approval and I don't think the present incumbents would be able to agree.

Then there is the minor fact they have not got an auditor yet. So I can't see that happening. IMHO.

I think the problem with forecasting the price they would need to pay if they wanted to take over is very very difficult, firstly if I remember correctly they bought the shares they initially had in a private transaction from a single seller, without trying to research I think it was Raskikev.

I think, rather than surmising we need to just wait and see what happens. Look, they have managed to oust the founder and CEO, But they are shareholders, just like you and me and are not in the boardroom.

It is going to be an interesting next few weeks, or longer to see what transpires.

Maybe just maybe, they are not interested in buying the company, Maybe they just want a facility to process there own gold. As long as its a fare price, thats fine.

I wonder what will happen with Temi now ???? Bearing in mind we have paid a large deposit. ???

CoFe because its the conversion price that matters. Otherwise they would have got far fewer shares. When the convertible bonds were set. They have a pre set price. And that is the price they are converted at. Share price when they converted is irrelevant.

L3TRADER, WHAT WAS THE CONVERSION PRICE, What price did they pay, thats whats important not the price the shares were when they were converted, thats irrelevant its the conversion price that matters, Not the share price when they were converted. They were converted at a conversion price of about 13,5 cents I reckoned about 12.5 p.

CoFe simple reply to that. You are WRONG with your assertion they can not take us out at less than 41.5.

(Prosperity Capital Management has criticised other shareholders for their actions at Petropavlovsk PLC's extraordinary general meeting, in which the chair and chief executive were ousted.

Shares in Petropavlovsk were down 0.8% at 33.15 pence in London on Tuesday morning.

In a statement on Monday, Prosperity, which controls 17% stake in FTSE 250-listed Russia-focused gold miner Petropavlovsk, expressed disappointment that the Everest Alliance - JSC Uzhuralzoloto group of companies' recently enlarged size allowed it and its affiliates to "overwhelm the ballot box".

According to Prosperity, Everest "drowned out both the voices of minority shareholders and the recommendations of leading independent proxy advisors Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis."

Prosperity said what remains of the board after the vote should start looking for more independent non-executives straight away and "in a transparent manner" to be sure it is not being influenced by Everest and UCG.

Alexander Branis, chief investment advisor at Prosperity, said: "This is a disappointing result, but we remain unbowed. We had many positive discussions with our fellow minority shareholders in the run-up to the EGM all of whom affirmed our position that Petropavlovsk deserves a strong, independent board that will help ensure that the company's intrinsic value is not masked by poor governance.

"We do not intend to stand by as control of our company is surreptitiously transferred to Everest and UGC, the latter of which claimed that it wanted a board comprised of truly experienced, diverse, and independent directors which we now clearly do not have. We will continue to engage with Petropavlovsk shareholders, management, and the board to ensure that governance enables rather than impedes sustained value creation."

Petropavlovsk on Monday said resolutions ousting its chair and chief executive passed at a requisitioned general meeting, along with a resolution requiring it to arrange for an independent forensic investigation.

The successful resolution to remove all directors appointed since July 9 was proposed by Everest Alliance Ltd. The forensic investigation, which will cover related party transactions for the three years prior to the requisitioned meeting, was also proposed by Everest Alliance.

Everest's resolutions to appoint Paul Bushell and Ivan Kulakov to the Petropavlovsk board, failed, but all of its other resolutions succeeded. These included resolutions to remove Non-Executive Chair Peter Hambro, Chief Executive Alya Samokhvalova, and Non-Executive Directors Johnny Smith and Angelica Phillips.

Prosperity Capital Management proposed the appointment of Michael Kavanagh to the board, which was approved. However, the passing of the Everest director removal resolution means Petropavlovsk must remove him as a director.

Prosperity's other resolutions, to re-appoint Damien Hackett and Harry Kenyon-Slaney, as well as to appoint Vitaliy Zarkhin, fa

I meant Alya, unfortunately, posting between work..

Details of the person discharging managerial responsibilities/person closely associated

a)

Name Dr Alya Samokhvalova Reason for the notification a) Position/status Chief Executive Officer b) Initial notification/Amendment Initial notification Details of the issuer, Name Petropavlovsk PLC
Details of the transactions(s): section to be repeated for (i) each type of instrument; (ii) each type of transaction; (iii) each date' and (iv) each place where transactions have been conducted Description of the financial instrument, type of instrument
Identification code Ordinary shares of 1 pence ISIN: GB0031544546 Nature of the transaction Disposal of shares Prce(s) and volume 34.320 pence 463,182 Aggregated information Date of the transaction 7 August 2020
11th Aug 2020 11:30 am RNS PDMR Dealing Notice

Personally I think it is an absolute disgrace, she has sold out on Friday, if that is not either insider dealing or complete disregard to other shareholders I will eat my hat. And that will not be very tasty. She, in my opinion is showing total contempt to other shareholders by this action. There is a rule that directors should not trade if they are in a position of holding insider information. Someone tell me that she didn't have an idea of the way vote was going. In my opinion utter contempt, and should be looked into. We are well rid.

paulh143, I have no problem, with your posts. Your opinion. My opinion hasn't changed, regardless of his faults, My preference, would have been for Pavel to stay, so I can't suddenly change the record if he has gone.

If he had stayed, it would have been nice to have a look from a third party at the deals, but, of course for the moment Pavel is history. I still think if Pavel had got back in it would have had a positive effect on SP, But as you say, this is history, we need to move on. I do have opinions, and I will post them, I do not get it right every time, I just wish I did.

The thing about it is, They are only opinions, if anyone doesn't agree, thats great, lets have a debate, happy to do that. It helps me learn, because as I have said a number of times, I do not know it all. But, I wish I had written it down all the times something had happened at POG that I was uncertain about because with the shenanigans that have went on here, I could have wrote a book. Lets just hope we have many more chapters to come, and we get some positivity back.

As a last point, ally Unbelievable

Paulh143, you say share price was going to dip whichever way the vote went, that is a ridiculous statement. If The old board had got back in, we would have had stability at least for a time, the board would have met the rules for corporate governance and we would likely have got our auditor back. The price in my opinion would have risen by a couple of pence.

I am not saying it would have went sky high, certainly not, but, I am quite sure it would have went up.

Always clever to be wise after the event.

I posted before the vote, that if it went against the bod, the SP would fall, it did.

Unless you are a day player, it shouldn't be concerning. As someone else put, as long as the ducks line up together it will go up in the longer term just based on the simple fundamentals.

CoFe I havent bought or sold any POG for about 6 years. Still hold exactly the same amount. Did think a couple of times about buying more, but didnt, but, NEVER, thought about selling, and I will not sell. Despite the shenanigans I often write about, I always give the caveat, That there are more positives than negatives.

If price drops, I might be tempted, but happy with the amount I hold, not anywhere near as many as some on here, but nevertheless an amount I am comfortable with.

I have to laugh at some of the comments on here, especially this morning, when the price was dropping. Bloody hell this is Pog, I remember in the olden days a swing of 10% in a day was not uncommon. There is plenty mileage left, lets just hope we can get a positive resolution. Because unless we get the board sorted and a New experienced CEO, WE ARE A RUDDERLESS SHIP. Out of control.

I have no trust in any of the board that are left. We need to get someone in, and quickly. Who, I dont know, and I honestly dont know who is actually in charge. But we need direction. We have the product, we have the facilities we just need steerng in the right direction.

I am surprised Pavel didnt try and rally the troops with one of his interviews. Went like a damp squib. But its happened before, and I dare say, he will try and come back. Time will tell. Over and out for tonight. Interesting next couple of weeks.

Freddie2, its quite Ironic, whilst the posters with rose tinted spectacles were proclaiming £2, I have for years commented about things that were either unexplained, potentially underhand, concealed, or gobblegook. I did not forsee a large institution calling for an investigation, but, I am not surprised. There have been, many deals where the fees seem to have been concealed. Even when Gazprombank were supplying funds for forward priced gold, there was never any mention of fees.

I still wait in vain for someone on here to explain the bit in the accounts about them, and how they work out the net debt. Never,ever, any mention of cash reserves. Why. I am not going to change what I have said all along. I would have preferred Pavel to be at the helm. But I have long called for transparency.

The reality is, we have a great product, and an even better product to process it.

I can see an enquiry unearthing some things, whether they are major, who knows. But I still believe IRC CAN BE A BENEFIT. I certainly think its worth more than the coppers they were going to sell it for.

I know Retired Banker will disagree, but there have been a lot of positives over there. Time will tell.

BofA sees gold hitting $3,000/oz., silver at $50/oz.
(Sharecast News) - Strategists at Bank of America hiked their 18-month target for gold futures from $2,000/oz. to $3,000/oz. as governments continue to act to mend the damage from Covid-19, backstopped by central banks.

Will probably mean gold will drop as they cream off money from their clients. But, if gold did hit those heights and we can get some proven leaders experienced at the top level, then this can be a very very profitable company.

Just need to get a New CEO, A new board, an Auditor, get the investigation done, refinance the $500m bonds pay off the rest of the convertibles, find the helicopter, then the rest is plain sailing.

And lets remember what they did years ago I think it was with with blinky, but its a long long time ago, shorting a company, then complaining when it went against them.

There will be articles of association which will say exactly what is required. 4 members is not anywhere near enough. I just wonder who is at the reins of the ship at the moment.

Look at the RNS when the auditors announced they were not taking over. That board is not anywhere near large enough for corporate governance.

There needs to be a big change to it including appointing maybe ceo deputy ceo etc etc.

There are big rules relating to this especially with the capital value of the company. And auditors will want to make sure they comply before agreeing to it. As I said look at RNS previous.

COPPER3 One big problem, We DONT, have an auditor, and until we sort a NEW BOD. wE CANT GET ONE, SO RESULTS WILL LIKELY BE PUSHED BACK

Lawrence 13 benefit of hindsight, but, you don't lost ISA status if you sell, money is just retained in IA till you buy something else. Cant post much at work, will catch up later.

Updownflat, get your facts right, they didn't buy a helicopter, they took it from IRC for monies that were owed to them, and probably the value of the helicopter was overstated as well