Member Info for sicilian_kan

No news, you are wrong. See my earlier post.

The enterprise value at the time of the note was £39m as that was the market cap of £43.6m less the cash held of £4.1m.

The enterprise value today is of course less because the market cap is less! It is not and never will trade at a discount to its enterprise value, which will move with the share price!

You are erroneously conflating enterprise value with a net asset value.

For clarity, the enterprise value they quote is not a price target or a value on GGP. It is just the then market cap (£43.6m) minus the then cash (£4.5m).

The next question is what conclusions can be drawn from the information in my earlier post , which set out a history of the RNSs issued by VAL on discussions. Here are some key points.

1. VAL haven't always asserted they were engaged in discussions. There was silence in 2015 and the matter was first raised only on 19 May 2016.

2. The initial RNS statements were very tentative. The appointment of a US IR firm to further discussions is hardly suggesting that a licensing deal is imminent. To the contrary, it suggests very early discussions.

3. The tentative nature of the comments continued. By 29 November 2016, they were having some prearranged follow up meetings. Again, hardly a suggestion that a licensing deal was imminent.

4. Further references in 2017 merely state "ongoing" or "continuing" discussions. There is no reference anywhere to any form of advanced or detailed discussions. It was clear that no deal was imminent and that discussions were still early stage.

5. This was again clear the 12 December 2017 when VAL was seeking to provide further 401 data to potential licensees. If talks were advanced, this would not have been necessary. The insinuation is that VAL hoped that talks might get to the next stage if that further data was released.

6. The real developments in VAL's assertions have only been seen in the last 3 months. In the July 2018 RNS, VAL stated that the fundraising was also a component of negotiations for commercial transactions and licensing deals. Note the word negotiations. In addition, funds had never before been raised specifically for this purpose.

7. This progress to later stage discussions was furthered in the 6 September 2018 RNS, when VAL stated that they were in "Detailed discussions". This is the first ever use of that word in an RNS. Simlarly that external partners "will" have substantial input into the P3 trial design, with first dosing anticipated next year. Note the use of the word "will" and the confidence to suggest when dosing will commence for a Phase 3 trial.

My conclusions from all of the above and my previous post on the timeline is that:

1. VAL have never overstated their case in an RNS. To the contrary, the early stage of discussions was always clear.

2. Many shareholders have been guilty of reading too much into VAL's statements and now are guilty of unfairly criticising the company's previous assertions on this point.

3. VAL have now entered the stage of "detailed discussions" and Phase 3 trial input, with funds raised for "negotiations" and P3 dosing is anticipated next year. These are major developments. All of this significant progress has been formally announced in the last 3 months.

4. Sometimes shareholders need to wake up and smell the coffee. There are no guarantees, but do not be surprised if a 401 deal for Phase 3 is announced in the next 1-8 weeks and do not complain if you miss out.

I spent a little time yesterday evening reviewing every RNS that VAL has issued since the end of 2014 / start of 2015. The purpose of my review was to see what was said and when about licensing discussions. There have been a lot of accusations on this board about the BoD overegging things for their own purposes and I wanted to investigate whether or not this was true. Below are my key findings.

1. In April 2015, there was reference to attending the 2015 BIO International Convention. There was no reference to existing discussions.

2. The first RNS mention of discussions commencing was in 19 May 2016, when it was said "Recently, we engaged a leading US investor relations firm to further discussions with potential partners and these are continuing."

3. From 14 July 2016, RNSs have stated in the footer: "The group is already in licensing discussions with major players in the oncology field".

4. On 29 November 2016, and RNS stated that they had attended the BIO-Europe conference that month, that they had some pre-arranged meetings, "some of which were follow-up meetings from prior events"

5. On 8 December 2016, VAL stated when a 201 patent was granted that "This grant supports the potential value of the compound and solidifies our opportunity in ongoing discussions with potential partners".

6. On 5 May 2017, in their final results, VAL stated in the Outlook section "Based on the positive results of the VAL201 and VAL401 compounds, the ValiRx team continue their discussions concerning late stage clinical studies and regarding potential partnerships and collaborations with pharmaceutical partners"

7. On 28 September 2017, in relation to BIO-Europe 2017, it was said that "Dr Suzanne Dilly will be attending the Bio-Europe bio-partnering conference in Berlin in November 2017 in order to partake in one to one meeting with other delegates to discuss these emerging results".

8. On 12 December 2017, VAL stated in an update on the 401 results that "The Company is in discussion with a number of large pharmaceutical companies who are looking to fill their pipelines in this therapeutic area".

9. On 6 July 2018, in the supporting documentation (Notice of the GM), VAL stated "The board believes it is in the best interests of the Company and shareholders for the directors to be able to allot shares. This is both for purposes of fundraising to progress clinical trial programmes and also as a component of negotiations for commercial transactions and licensing deals".

10. On 6 September 2018, VAL stated in an update on clinical development that "Detailed discussions are in progress in respect to a pivotal Phase III Clinical Trial. Partners external to ValiRx and ValiSeek will have substantial input into the trial design, with first dosing anticipated next year".

“HAD005 is considered material because it represents a visible mineralised intersection<br />approximately twice the size of that detected in HAD001.”<br /><br />There is a mother load of gold down there.

Can people stop comparing GGP to OMI. The Anza project is in COLOMBIA. Mining in Colombia is a total and utter disaster. You could have 20m oz of gold there and still not be able to produce. Good grades mean nothing.

Want some examples? Here goes...

In 2017, AngloGold Ashanti suspended all exploration at the La Colosa project in Colombia, which has a 26.8m oz gold resource, and which could have produced 1m oz per year for 20 years, due to a local vote banning mining in the municipality. The project remains suspended and the Environment Agency says it is obliged to comply with the popular decision.

Also in 2017, the Canadian company Gran Colombia Gold had to sue the Government of Colombia for $700m for forcing the company to halt operations at its Marmato project until further consultation with locals has been conducted. The project has measured and indicated resources of 11.4m oz of gold. They then had to agree to underground mining only slashing the proposed mine to just 1.5m of oz produced over 12 years. They also have to deal concurrently with the presence of illegal miners in the concession. The first ones occupied the area in late September, blocking roads and costing the miner $2 million in daily losses.

Anyone remember Greystar Resources on AIM, which became Eco Oro? They had 15m oz of gold and a feasibility study to produce 500k per year. They failed to get the environment permit to mine and are now suing the Colombian state for $764m in damages.

The list goes on. Anyone really want me to continue? I can.

So yes, OMI have good grades, but any wonders why Newmont have failed to pay a decent up front fee there? $2m up front but not in cash rather in a dilutitive placing, $2m cash in 2 years and a further $2m cash within 6 years, is a total joke of a deal for OMI.

Here's why OMI's deal is so bad for them...you could have 30m oz of gold in Colombia and spend $200m getting the resource and feasibility study, and it means nothing, absolutely nothing, because many, many locals in Colombia are vehemently anti-mining and the getting a mine into production is incredibly hard.

In short, OMI's Anza project isn't worth the paper it is written on. It is completely worthless at this stage because the project is in Colombia, one of the most unfriendly mining countries in the world. Until all permits are obtained, and until all locals are onside (inherently likely), the project really is pie in the sky.

Next, would you like me to discuss OMI's financials?? Really?

Anyhow enough for now, safe to say that small punters ramping OMI haven't got a clue about the context of the exceptional drill results here at Havieron and the fact that GGP's project is in mining safe AUSTRALIA, next to massive projects in areas where mining is welcomed with open arms, with good infrastructure on tap.

So please, stop ramping OMI. Try to understand mining and not just grades.

I see the same names here as at the date of the GM. On both occasions, trying to drown out conversation with their discontent and posting endlessly all day.

Just remember though that these noisy posters really are an insignificant minority. Go back to the GM and their BB campaign waged against the resolutions. As it turned out, the vote in favour of allotting shares was 97% in favour of the company and just a pathetically small 3% against.

And today, we see the same disgruntled drivel again. A sad tiny minority of people preferring to have the company go into administration than to survive, disproportionately representing their views on here.

As it stands, the reality is that everyone with half a brain cell could see the placing coming. However, it is clear from the company's RNS and video statements that a deal is now highly likely to be forthcoming. DYOR etc.

What is the value of a drug in Phase 3? Immupharma went over £250m for what was in effect an 85% stake [i.e. minus CNRS share]. VAL, with its share of the P3 drug should at least 3-5 bag on a deal from the current position. To me, being in, at least until Christmas, in anticipation of that deal - plus with funding now sorted for that period - is a no brainer.

As ever, DYOR.

Thoth2, you can speak for yourself. Just because you have failed to heed the placing warning signs...

Now there is a deal warning sign...

I want to be in for the deal.

Just watch the VAL video interview here from a week ago...

h T T p://w ww.pr oactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/stocktube/10377/commercial-discussions-for-valirx-s-lead-cancer-drug-progressing-rapidly--10377.html

What it states about VAL401 is:

- Clinical study report submitted to the regulators end July, usually takes 3-5 months to get approval to proceed;

- Re Phase 3 discussions with partners "We are talking with a range of funders. Who's going to be funding what and for where. It's very likely there will be some sort of consortium set up with a sponsor from within that network to undertake the liability and carry the risk of the project...The discussions on all those points are progressing rapidly...We hope that they will be completed shortly and we are looking to undertake the Phase 3 trial...on VAL401 early in 2019"

- "The exact nature of the deal / deals is still open to interpretation and discussion but it's JV / licensing as we've previously indicated"

- "Significant interest...most definitely"

So yes, whilst there has been a placing, to me it was expected as was the price drop, hence my previous posts. VAL now have enough money to do a deal and the funds raised were said to be for 101, 201 and 301. 401 (owned 55% by VAL in a jv company) was not mentioned in the fundraising reasons.

I'm expecting a deal soon. What I do not know is who it is with, whether there is any up front payment, how good the deal is, etc.

But it is hopefully going into Phase 3 - and the value there, even if licensed, must surely be worth more than the current £10m market cap. I could very well be wrong, but I am hoping for a 3-5 bagger before Christmas. Now that the placing is done, I think the downside low compared to the upside.

Those who are hoping for a further fall are in my view likely to be disappointed. The time to sell was in anticipation of the placing, not now in anticipation of the deal!

There’s no deal yet. This was the placing rns. Allows them to now brief those from whom they want to raise monies. If there was a deal imminently this rns was not necessary. Also why did they say detail discussions and not the industry standard advanced discussions or advanced Negotiations.

Placing expected soon in my view.

Also 201 efficacy was worded very weakly.

Excellent point - post rec

*81.7g/t

Those really are monster grades. 1.7g/t, 45.7g/t, 37.6g/t, 33.9g/t, 28.2g/t, 23.5g/t, 19.6g/t, 17.5g/t, 14.1g/t, 13.0g/t and 12.4g/t.

But more impressively, it is the sheer volume of them. 11 out of 28 rock chip samples came in at over 10g/t, this at surface.

So the company drilling Havieron is willing, yesterday, to accept shares valued at 1.25p with warrants exercisable at 2.00p, as part payment of its fees.

But some shareholders are selling at 0.95p.

Whom should I trust better. Mug punters selling out on a non-rns that had no bearing on Havieron or its value for GGP, or one of the leading drilling companies in the world.

Anybody selling at 0.95p because of Ernest Giles needs their head examined.

The share price fall is a joke. I do not know any serious investor who bought into GGP for Ernest Giles, let alone who thought that it was worth 15% of the market cap. The recent price movements just an overreaction to an RNS that doesn't actually mean anything when it comes to value at GGP. GGP is Havieron - long and short of it [with a little goodwill for Black Hills].

Focus then on the 121m at 2.93g/t gold and 0.23% copper, including the exceptional intersection 11.5m at 21.23g/t gold and 0.67% copper at Havieron. The drilling company is focusing on those results and is wanting shares in GGP. I've never seen a drilling company accept significant part payment in shares. That tells you ALL you need to know about Havieron [although the numbers above did that in any event].

This should be a great buying opportunity, possibly the best one ever here, because it will be an informed purchase based upon the HAD001 discovery of a massive motherload of gold, rather than some pot luck greenfield exploration drilling at lesser sites. Once the next Havieron drill results are out, the share price should not be anywhere near here.

*multibagging sale of GGP.

Forget nuggets at Black Hills, forget Ernest Giles, forget share trades, forget the drilling at Havieron, other than the most important of the intersections, 11.5m at 21.23g/t gold and 0.67% copper.

I have already posted before about how those grades are exceptional.

Think of this another way. 11.5m at 21.23g/t and 0.67% Cu doesn't just randomly appear in a small splodge. That is one motherload of gold.

I have seen other AIM companies get exceptional grades. Take the recent example of Mariana Resources, who owned only 30% of Hot Maden. Points to note:

(a) Where an exceptional grade is hit, only hitting exceptional grades in one of the first batch of holes is normal:

- Of the first four drill holes, three hit narrow 1m widths not worth anything. The fourth was a monster, hitting 103m x 8.96g/t, see RNS on 2 Feb 15.

(b) The first drill grades usually aren't the highest - that would be incredibly unlikely statistically:

- 1 year from first drill MARL hit 71m at 32.7 g/t gold and 1.9% copper, i.w. 3x the gram metres of first good hole.

- 22 months from first drill MARL hit 82.2g gold and 1.44% copper over 60.6m. That is 5.5x the gram meters of the first good hole.

(c) With good grades, it doesn't take long to define a resource, where valuations can then be placed:

- Within 9 months of first drill, on 1 Nov 15, Mariana announced a resource of 2.9m oz gold.

(d) Good drilling results lead to the sale of the prospective company very quickly

- 26 months after the first drill hole was announced, MARL was bought out (it had only a 30% interest in Hot Maden remember) for £167m. The other projects were relatively worthless. Hot Maden was therefore valued at £556m.

Now focus on what is important in mining.

1. Grade / width. Havieron appears to have it in spades.

2. Country. Australia, as safe as it comes. Rule of law is strong, corruption is low, taxes and licenses are clear and fair. Compare with Mariana, in Turkey, which is a difficult country to operate in. Getting permits in Turkey can be very difficult and time consuming.

3. Infrastructure. Again Havieron has it in spades. Well known mining area, close to Telfer, no large conurbations near by. Infrastructure will be neither difficult not costly for mine of this nature.

4. Metallurgy. Well we will need to await that.

5. Depth. Clearly this will be underground mining. With these grades, it should be very profitable. Obviously, we await the next round of drilling, the first drills targeted with the knowledge of the first drill hole.

In my view, the current GGP market cap is easily justified and we could without any surprise be looking at a 2x-10x bagger in 0-2 years, based upon Havieron alone. We all know there are other very exciting prospects. People here need to see the wood for the trees. Don't focus on nuggets, or share trades. Focus on the drill result that suggests a motherload of gold that could lead to a multibag

It's obvious that there is going to be a placing or other type of dilutive fundraising. They had the GM to do that and the resolutions passed.

In my view it is highly likely that the placing will be issued before a 401 deal and the price will be around 2p.

The share price drift suggests that the same is anticipated by the market.

In my view, this becomes a buy once the buy price becomes 2.25p or once a placing is announced. Until then, it is not.

So you are £35k down on your most recent trades using the current spread; and you wrote off additional significant amounts on both of your two previous times invested in this share.

And you are happy and think people should listen to you?

Before the GM, there was a sustained campaign by 5 or 6 posters on here to get people to vote against the resolutions. The posters sought to dominate this board for long periods of time and the volume of their noise was substantial.

In the event, there were only 1,538,486 votes (about £42k of shares) against the first resolution and 2,940,640 votes (about £81k of shares) against the second resolution. That is a pathetically low number who voted against, relative to the preponderence of noise on this board at the time.

Now I see a number of posters suggesting that there will not be a funding call and that just headroom is sought. But this is also likely to be noise from the deluded. I would personally be staggered if the headroom was not used before any announcement of a 401 deal is made. In addition, any rational shareholder would not be buying in size at present and will be waiting to see whether there is dilution (whether by placing, rights issue or otherwise), i.e. if the headroom is used in part, and if so at what price.

I may be wrong and DYOR as ever, but I would rather be wrong on my side than be wrong on the other side and I think the odds are firmly in my favour.