Member Info for SharketMare

If we sell our 30% stake in Hav we go back to being an exploration company, albeit one with a large amount of cash on the balance sheet, some of which I imagine would be returned to shareholders as a special dividend.

I really struggle to see how a sale tallies with Shaun's stated goal of building a billion dollar business. Hav is the cash cow that will allow us to explore, acquire and grow. A sale at this stage would be a disappointing outcome, an all out takeover of GGP slightly less so depending on the price paid. But production is my preference.

Dip. At current SP I think anything north of 15p he'd be required to ask us the question.

Zoros: my preferred outcome is Wyloo buying Telfer and the 70% share of Hav. All future GGP made discoveries within vicinity of Telfer to be processed there, with Wyloo offered right of first refusal should we ever look for a JV partner on a new discovery.

DM, I also disagreed with those comments from TheItalian which I actually thought were made in pretty poor taste. I don't think the size of an investment has any bearing on an investor's ability to rationally discuss the pros and cons of a business and its management.

Both TheItalian and rcgl2 raise some good points about what has been achieved by the current team, but Scott & co didn't manage expectations at all well post-merger, as you rightly point out.

Fort: "Have you noticed that since Sharketmare publically stated he bought back in, the negative comments seem to have disappeared."

What a load of BS. You are more desperate by the day Fort.

I did laugh when less than a week after you posted here that "FMG" would look to bleed GGP dry, Wyloo (who you actually meant) came in and offered them an optional debt funding deal. Bleeding them dry indeed.

DM - we have been given a rough deadline for the PFS (Q1 2024) and the exploitation license has landed (I was surprised this came before the IPA and before Q4).

Rcgl2 ref your post y'day at 16.48 -

Broadly agree that Scott is the best of the bunch so far. But there is no way Sangha would have done that ridiculous interview with the Mining Journal without his approval. He's since rowed back from it publicly and privately after it became apparent that "fast and smart" was wishful thinking, and is now having to go cap in hand for votes from the two majors at the AGM this year. But ultimately that piece is on Scott and 10 months or so later it's an embarrassment.

I am struggling to comprehend how some on here are simultaneously criticising DC's tenure, which was characterised by an underwhelming, smaller and more realistic PFS and praising Caldwell for seeking to do the same, perhaps on an even smaller scale? I was no fan of DC but I imagine he's sitting there laughing at the fact that the company's only publicly stated ambition is to essentially do what he tried and failed to.

I'm still thinking (or hoping at this point) that the IPA and permits are the outstanding blockers to a deal and that all this talk of PFS 3 in Q1 next year is just buying time. And they have to be delivered this side of the AGM for Scott to maintain any level of credibility.

Even delivering the exploitation license, the IPA and the environmental permits (only the exploitation license has landed so far) over a 12 month period is simply not enough activity for a company of our size. What is everyone actually doing on a day to day basis? Making tea for those in the data room?

Excellant schools eh! Keep digging NAL, this is hilarious.

Dunk_Biscuit, are you sure you have properly understood our JV with Rio? We are stumping up cash to drill their licenses, not the other way around. To say we have struck gold is premature until we actually do strike gold, which is by no means a given.

I think the chances of us selling Hav are very slim as it is an ideal platform from which SD can build us into the £bn company he desires.

Once we are producing and paying off our debt, the SP upside from another successful strike will be enormous, ideally at one of our 100% owned licenses.

Must admit I'm disappointed at the market reaction to this news. Thought we would do 20-30% as the spectre of a fundraise has been put to bed, and we have a buffer to cover any extra spend for the Hav FS.

It's heartening to know that we have such a supportive shareholder in the form of Wyloo. Appreciate they too have skin in the game, but they've done Shaun a real solid here.

Trippy, your head is buried firmly in the sand if you think otherwise.

I think Shaun has realised there was absolutely no way he could justify a raise at these levels to PIs who make up a considerable chunk of his base.

What other reason is there to defer the listing that half the people on here claimed would be a boon to the share price? I can't think of one.

Trippy, it clearly was part of the plan alongside the cross listing if you read today's RNS properly. Now we are no longer listing on ASX it won't be pursued / necessary. This is a much better outcome for shareholders. Not fussed about the delay in x listing as I was never convinced it would see a substantial re-rate.

Redknight, the only person who has established a correlation between the PoG and SOLG is you. No one else thinks that idea to be remotely plausible.

Thanks for sharing. Did not realise they were not on a retainer.

Q, I think you are confusing the strategic review with the revisions to the approach at Cascabel, which are two separate workstreams.

The strategic review is open ended and has apparently been delayed/slowed in progress due to the political situation in Ecuador.

The new approach to Cascabel will be released in Q1 2024, and will not have been impacted by the politics as far as I can tell.

Moreover, why would any major with "deep pockets" want to be a junior partner in such an arrangement?

Q, if we do go down the JV route I struggle to see how we would retain majority ownership. I don't think we have the credibility to raise the requisite funds in that scenario to fund our share of development.

I would add that I am banking on some sort of deal before we reach that stage, or else I wouldn't be invested.

Bozi, what frustrates me is that we've also flagged to the market and any potential buyer when we will run out of cash. In absence of a bid from a competitor, a sitting on hands approach for buyers until we near that time seems to make sense, as the company is doing very little other than negotiating (important) agreement with the government.

The updated Cascabel PFS in Q1 is going to have to be a real rabbit from hat moment from Scott if we want to have any chance of further fundraising next year at a price that isn't single digits.

Hunter.io is very good for finding email addresses. In a past life I had to track down bismirched celebs and other disgraced figures and offer to help them rebuild their reputations. A morally challenging job at times.

Shippy, the obvious question here is why you feel the need to get in touch with Fawzi?