Member Info for SharketMare

Culpepper, agreed, it would be nice for SD to put his hand in his pocket and reinvest some of the £500k he earned from the company last year to give himself a further incentive to get the share price moving in the right direction, and provide some reassurance to the market! Also expect as you pointed out earlier his 25p options to be re-visited and the exercise price brought down.

I'm not in a position to add here at the moment and will wait for concrete news on the potential funding before doing so. Sadly with an average of a touch over 10p I am going to have to average down to get the return I'd hoped for!

StanAccy, I am in that group and I don't think that's accurate. BT has joined this morning and there have already been one or two 'candid' questions/comments, so I don't think it's being moderated. Should make for entertaining viewing.

AgArCu, don't you have other BBs to disrupt to fill your clients' orders? Or is that saved for your other moniker, 1981Investor?

The share price is not being manipulated. How long until this nonsense is put to bed. We have just told the market that we've been in discussion with banks about a possible raise. Of course the SP is going to drop.

Questions RE manipulation get laughed off by SD because he knows they're garbage.

Jungle, it was meant to convey what I'd prefer to see happen rather than what I think will happen. Essentially in between now and the end of September I expect to see, in no particular order: 1) Rights issue (following today's leak, I think it's pretty much nailed on) 2) Release of updated MRE 3) Consolidation 4) Listing on ASX.

There is a way of doing the above in a way that *could* be less painful to retail investors but would likely mean that instis have to pay a higher entry price. Shaun will know that there is substantial cash sitting in Aussie funds waiting to buy in to the GGP story, and there is likely to be more of it at these bargain prices.

As for heft - when we released the debt/equity financing package for the development of Hav it was lauded (and rightly so) for giving the company just that.

Agree with your point on consolidation and think it will be towards the upper estimates of what you posted.

Jungle, I never said he'd risk the ASX listing on those events. Further, listing on the ASX isn't business critical, is it? Why does it need to be done in the September 2023 quarter?

Timber, the best interests of the company over the long term are not always aligned with those of retail investors, who make decisions based upon information known at the time they invest and personal timelines for wanting a return or exit on their investment. This isn't anything new and is part of the game we all choose to play. The GGP story has changed considerably due to factors outside of our control, and understandably some PIs are going to be miffed that the decisions they made aren't going to be as profitable as they might have hoped, or worse, might result in them losing money.

Jdt1990 - the minimum listing price on the ASX is 0.20AUD which equates to £0.11. The timeline we have been given is the September 2023 quarter (can someone confirm whether this is simply Q3?). I think that in between now and listing we'll see the release of the FS based upon an updated MRE (August), which should re-rate the share price. At which point we will be in a better position for consolidation, and listing on the ASX. That's the order in which I'd hope to see things play out and one that wouldn't be quite as painful for retail.

I worry as you do that we will not follow the above timeline and will get a raise way at these lower prices where insti appetite is likely to be much greater.

Culpepper, broadly agree with that. As long as the placing isn't lower than the 8.2p Wyloo paid last year, I'm not overly fussed.

Would be interested to see the breakdown of Keith Pollocks and Ryan Wilson's salaries. The two combined come to $418,040. Caldwell is paid $95,513.

For comparison, last year it was reported that the combined salaries of Dennis Wilkins (Company Secretary), Benn Whistler (Technical Services Manager), Chris Connell (Regional Exploration Manager, resigned January 2022), Peter Holmes (Director of Studies), Ingo Hofmaier (Interim Chief Financial Officer), Lisa Park (Metallurgy Manager), and Tania Cashman (Chief People Officer) came to just $371,475, which seems almost implausibly low?!

To clarify the below, we did drill at Tandy (2,558m) and Moran (437m) but it looks like that expenditure was booked in the period ending Dec '22.

I notice we did not spend a cent on further exploration on Cascabel (which I believe covers Tandy) in Jan-March this year. We have spent $283.5m since 2013. The IPA, which we are renegotiating, required us to spend $430m by the end of 2023 on Cascabel exploration, so we are $146.5m short. Any potential buyer will want this issue sorted by SOLG prior to any takeover, and the company expects this to be done by year end.

I think a big dollop of patience is required here unfortunately.

Add, unchanged. Also agree with your early post RE spin off of assets excl. Cascabel into NewCo.

Surprised that we paid Maxit around $5m from July '22 - March '23. Does that seem right to you given your corporate finance background?

Add it was written in the prospectus that the company would update the market on financing following/alongside the strategic review in H1.

Quady, you seem to 'know' that, but every time one of us highlights from the relevant RNS what the strategic review is actually about, you disappear. They don't mention the words 'advancing Cascabel' once.

RR is entitled to his opinion, which is contradictory to the company's stated position that Cascabel has been 'adequately studied'. I have seen no evidence whatsoever that new management is pursuing financing options for Cascabel, thank heavens.

It's clear as day that we are up for sale, it's just a question of whether we can find a buyer.

Case in point - none of the capital letters I typed are showing in the below post.

"if the sr hasn't delivered anything of note before 31 dec 23 they will have been at it for a year whilst doing relatively little else apart from letting people go."

and getting paid via salaries and free shares too, bozi. imo there is no way they can justify not providing an update on the sr before h1 is out. as stated the other day i think we will get news that they are "in discussions with interested parties" with scant little else, buying themselves a few more months to get a deal done.

but we have to be prepared for the scenario that covgaz alludes to whereby we see an rns stating that the talks didn't bear any fruit or the potential offers didn't reflect the true value of the business. at which point in absence of a robust and credible plan b about the way forwards, the share price will tank.

it's a **** or bust play now and people should manage their positions accordingly. upside is potentially massive, but the downside could be very painful too.

p.s. this website has gone to sh*t after the updates - sort it out lse

DM, was just about to ask whether or not we were aware of how much has been spent on Cascabel to date, as when the initial IPA was signed in Nov '21, we committed to $430m of spend from 2013 to 2023, and claimed that by end '21 we would have spent $238m. From the latest MD&A, we can see that we spent $17.2m in H2 2022. I can't seem to work out or find the spend in H1 2021 as we change the way we report (some times 9 months, sometime quarter ending X date). If we assume we spent similar (which is a little crass). That brings us up to a total of $270m or thereabouts, leaving $160m committed to spend this year, which we don't appear to have any intention to do.

Are these figures sound to you or have I missed something?

I imagine that this in part is what is forming the basis of the renegotiation, along with the "other benefits" that weren't previously available when we originally signed in Nov '21.

The issue any prospective buyer might have is whether a revised IPA will hold weight under a potential change of leadership.

Addicknt, I think the investment protection agreement we are renegotiating with the current gov't is a bigger piece to the puzzle than many think. Much more so than the China/Ecuador FTA. From the latest MD&A:

"An application to begin negotiations on the exploitation agreement for the Cascabel project was submitted to the Ministry of Energy and Mines (“MINEM”) on 31 August 2022 and was deemed admissible on 14 October 2022. Initial discussions regarding the Exploitation Agreement began in December 2022, and that the formal negotiation process began in January 2023. The Company has until December 2023 to complete the negotiation process with the establishment of a non-binding term sheet, and the submittal of a request to move into the exploitation phase.

In December 2022, the Company submitted an application to amend the previously subscribed Investment Protection

Agreement in order to align it with the exploitation agreement under negotiation and to obtain additional benefits provided by the government which were not available when the agreement was signed in 2021."

Perhaps RR has a point as this is key to protecting capital investment for whoever ends up building Cascabel, and we have until Dec '23 to complete it.

I can see the logic in the point he makes about political risk, less so on the need to provide definitive financing. SOLG also claim that Cascabel has been "adequately studied". Just over 7 weeks to go before they have to provide some sort of update on the SR. In absence of a firm offer I suspect we'll be told they are "in discussion with interested parties" but will withhold whether that is for the whole company or Cascabel. MD&A should make for interesting reading.