Member Info for SocialistB

@EdmMike
A takeover bid at any price is never a problem in itself.
It first becomes a problem when a majority of shareholders accepts it.
Whatever that reason may be.
Lack of patience.
Believing it it what the share is worth.

I have patience with this share and I believe it will be trading in pounds an not pence in 5-10 years time with the fantastic assets we have and since we are now becoming at least a quasi miner.

Maybe even sooner

Speedie.
Love the idea of Martu artwork added to either a coin or 1 Oz bar. But especially the coin.
Please put me down for 2, either way.
Great idea, and thanks for your effort.

Part 3

(hopefully we will never end up on 6 BILLION again)

Part 2

For the latest AGM (earlier this week) they proposed, and have been allowed to issue up to 620,000,000 new ordinary shares of 0.085 pence or approximately 154% of the current issued ordinary share capital of the Company.
Resolution 4 – Directors’ Authority to Allot Shares
EVO - Notice of AGM 2016 (final) (gunsynd.com)

After yesterday’s announcement of the warrants exercise for 5,128,176 ordinary shares, there will on or around the 15th of March 2021 be 409,219,576 ordinary shares in circulation.

To this you can add more then 67- 72 million options and warrants that are expiring on various dates up until some day 29-7-2023

You can find the info on page 41- 42
Gunsynd plc Annual Report and Accounts for the year ended 31 July 2020

So we could potentially end up having more then 1 BILLION shares in issue, before the next AGM.

409,219,576 ordinary shares in circulation.
67 - 72 million options and warrants.
Proposed 620,000,000 new ordinary shares

If all warrants and options are exercised we are likely to end up with 1,096,219,576 to 1,101,219,576 BILLION shares, maybe slightly more.

If Gunsynd ends up with over 1 BILLION shares again, I find it more difficult to argue that we will one day get a bumper payout from divesting our investments.

But what annoys me the most of all, is the disregard for old LTH’s who have slowly build a significant stake in the company. They can only sit on the sideline and watch their % shrink, not being invited to the option and warrants/discounted share issue party.

But why do they even consider diluting us old LTH’s into oblivion once again within a year?

I think the answer lies here:

From page 7:
“Gunsynd continues to look at investments in line with its investment policy. Such investment(s) if undertaken may or may not lead to a reverse takeover. “
Gunsynd plc Annual Report and Accounts for the year ended 31 July 2020

You can find out more about a reverse takeover here:
Reverse Takeover (RTO) Definition (investopedia.com)

Just to back up my statement about being diluted into oblivion once again within a year:

At 31 July 2019, 6,334,275,841 shares was issued in Gunsynd
Then at some point there was a Share Split
Share Consolidation (1 for 85) 74,520,893
Issue of new ordinary shares on 5 June 2020 74,520,893
Issue of new ordinary shares on 1 July 2020 17,786,799 15
Issue of new ordinary shares on 6 July 2020 71,538,462 61
Issue of new ordinary shares on 7 July 2020 16,000,000
At 31 July 2020 254,367,047

Page 36
Gunsynd plc Annual Report and Accounts for the year ended 31 July 2020

(and soon we will have a minimum of 409,219,576 ordinary shares in circulation)

My recommendation is that you make a game plan for investing in this share with some exit point, when and where to take profit, otherwise you might very well end up be disappointed, as we are once again headed towards more then 1 BILLION shares in issue.
(hopefully w

Part 1

I choose to see the RNS as good, but unfortunately there are other things to be worried about, when it comes to Gunsynd.

Aprogerson summerised yesterday’s RNS very well with the following points:

“
> No new shares or cash raise
> IPO date = 12-Mar-2021
> Total shares at IPO = 86,185,934 Ordinary Shares

POST ADMISSION
Ryan Dolder 9,353,685 10.85%
Gunsynd plc 24,543,563 28.48%
Janon Costley 5,411,209 6.28%
“
The above numbers adds up to 39,308,457 million shares or 45.6089%

To the POST ADMISSION above I would like to add the 36,247,500 that Human Brands hold in Rogue Baron as a result of transferring five subsidiaries, namely:
“Shinju Spirits, Inc., Shinju Whiskey LLC, Mazeray Corporation, STI Signature Spirits Group LLC and Legacy Retail Group LLC. The Company also owns a minority stake in the Hong Kong distribution company, Milestone Beverages. Legacy Retail Group LLC owns the Company’s ****tail bar in Washington D.C.; Bin 1301.”
(above sentence can be found here: https://www.aquis.eu/aquis-stock-exchange/for-investors

Combined, all those shares adds up to 75,555,957 million shares

When you subtract that from the 86,185,934 Ordinary Shares after the IPO, there is 10,629,977 shares that are unaccounted for.

I assume those 10 million+ shares are held by other investors. I do not think it is possible that they are held in treasury as the Rogue Baron prospectus states that the remaining 54.39% are in public hands.

So if it is the intention of the BOD of Rogue Baron to just get listed in the first place and then prove up the business and why it is an attractive investment at a significantly higher valuation, then I wish them the best of luck.

I would not mind that, as I do not find a listing at 7-8 pence attractive from our point of view.
The 36,247,500 million shares allocated to Human Brands was converted at a price of 7.8 pence.
Gunsynd plc Annual Report and Accounts for the year ended 31 July 2020

But going through the prospectus, it sounds like the BOD have other plans:
“The Company has built a structure, and will continue to grow a structure, which the Directors believe is advantageous and attractive from a buyout standpoint. There have been a number of mergers and acquisitions in the beverage industry in recent years which have had significant values (in the hundreds of millions and sometimes billions of US dollars).”

I am particularly glad that they are not issuing shares ad libitum in Rogue Baron, as it would water down the payout to Gunsynd.

AND I SO WISH, I COULD SAY THE SAME ABOUT GUNSYND.

Unfortunately the BOD are at it again.

Watering down existing shareholders.

The shares in Angold was sold for approximately 163000 quid, as announced on the 10th this month.
After having invested 65000 in low6 today, that should leave Gunsynd with approximately 98000 from the Angold sale, that can be invested elsewhere.
I for one would not mind seeing that money invested in Hemogenyx, after all ,we are an old pharma company.
But Rincon Resources would not go amiss either.
Any suggestions?

@TakingMyTime

My last post to you, last night, was in no way meant to be an offence towards you.

So reading your response this evening, I got slightly chocked, wondering what on earth I got up to last night. Well knowing that I was writing it in haste, as I found it rude not to respond after your mammoth effort, and did not do my usual double checking, as I was rather tired.

So just had a look at it, and unfortunately still don’t see it.

But rest assured, I had no intent on causing any offence.

Had a long day at work, and are unfortunately to tired to go through your 6 wonderful contributions last night.

But if memory serves me well, you were analysing it in more then one occasion from a “Who has the upper hand” and “Who gains the most, perspective”

If you do not mind then I would like to come back to you, with a pretend BOD dialogue, inspired by your own pretend BOD dialogue, and a few other goodies, when I get time and energy.
i.e. probably first in the weekend.

All the Best.

@Dhanteras

Thank you for your contribution.

I am not sure a deal with another major regarding PRE and Black Hills would have been possible.

Since Greatland Gold have no money and we want Havieron to progress ASAP, we needed 50 million.

I am afraid, that there is no majors out there, that would be willing to buy a stake in PRE and Black Hills for 50 million on better terms for Greatland Gold with the data currently available.

It would be deemed to risky.

Now, had we been in a position were we had sold 5% of Havieron or gotten a provisional payout at fair market value, we would have had enough cash to pay all our obligations and choose other partners.
If that is what we wanted.

But we do not have that luxury.

@TakingMyTime.

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you.

You have managed to lay open many of my thoughts and explain them in a way that goes down better with a lot people on this BB.

Despite my time and effort in dissecting my thoughts and lay them bare not much discussion has happened.
I’ll definitely not consider becoming a writer in this life or the next one. (try ever)

Maybe, I should just have argued that the deal was made under duress and that the BOD have made an amazing deal in keeping Scallywag.

I have some disagreements here and there. (one I do not dare to mention, afraid you’ll cut the feed:-)
And there are clear differences where we want to take chances. And the price we are willing to pay for taking them.

Clearly we cannot sell our 5% at Havieron anytime soon unfortunately.
Those money would have paid for our share of the mine at Havieron and drilling at Scallywag and maybe much much more.

In your scenario Newcrest comes across as more of a nemesis then a valued partner.

And if they have been going for Scallywag and our BOD have had to fight them of, then that is truly a shame.

To us shareholders, the content of both Scallywag and Goliath are unknown entities. The BOD clearly have a much better knowledge of what they may contain.
And if you’re in a situation where you are forced to give up an asset, then it is very well done when you manage to hold on the most known valuable asset.

After all, no one knows if Goliath is just dust.

But I would like to propose another line of thought. Newcrest took on the Juri-JV to do us and themselves a favour.
If the BOD of Greatland Gold has an interest in becoming a miner, they most certainly do not want a low ball offer from a different major.
And Newcrest could very well, be more interested in keeping us as a partner then a major.
Should Goliath turn out to contain more gold then dust and be as big as we dream, then Greatland Gold would be a siting target had we owned it 100%.
After the Juri-JV, that is less of a risk.

That time could be an enemy at PRE and Black Hills, I don’t think I ever thought about that argument.
I'll add it to my list over why this could be the best strategic move Greatland Gold ever made.
Thanks.

@TakingMyTime

Thank you for TakingYourTime to write so eloquently posts in reply.

This is very much what I am looking for.

Anyone else that want to chime in, please feel free.

There is no demand that they have to be long, just thoughtful.

@Bamps et al.

I knew I shouldn’t have tried to shorten my little essay. It creates misunderstandings.

I should have kept it longer, it would have pleased Dodgemeister:-)

No, the 50 million is earmarked on paying our part of the cost, of building the mine at Havieron.

But that deal was announced together with the Juri-JV and might therefore rightly be seen as a package deal, where one part is dependent on the other.

You are so absolutely right that we cannot pay 1 Billion or more to prove up Goliath, let alone any of the other targets. It is wast.

So my question to you, as I consider you to be a very knowledgeable person on the subject is:

Could the same formula that was applied at Havieron not have been used at Goliath, in theory?

My take is it could, but I do not know the law well enough (not at all, actually)

Havieron is also a sizeable licence, but the JV was only for 12 connecting blocks within Havieron and now a mining licence has been granted, if I remember correctly.

But if you tell me that it would not be legally possible. That the whole area at Goliath has to be drilled as a swizz cheese, well then that is another VERY good reason for the 75/25 split.
One that I so absolutely would subscribe to.
On top of my own protectionist theory. (which I still find valid, however that does not necessary make it true)

The deal is done and whatever I say can do nothing about it. My first post was definitely a yell in anger, as I thought we were now in a better position of strength. One where we would never have to accept giving up so huge percentages again.

Today it is more musings about what discussion was going on around the BOD table.

The for and against the different options, that they have had the possibility to choose among.

So to avoid any further possible misunderstandings.

The more I think about the Juri-JV, from a protectionist angle for Greatland Gold, the more I like the deal.

In fact, I am willing to go on record (anonymously, of course) and declare, that from that angle, I LOVE the deal.

I am interested in the different reasons people can think of, why this was the chosen deal.

Today it is the analytical thinking that I am interested in. The various round about thoughts.

The yelling in despair was so yesterday.

@fizzocks, that is exactly what I fear many would do.
But don't you worry, you will most likely get it soon enough.
But Greatland Gold will remain a company and not be taken over. (I hope)

Part 2

Northern Star was last night trading at more then A$13.60 or £6.5 according to my calculation principles mentioned earlier.

I want that for Greatland Gold and if the only way to get there within the next 10 years is by giving 75% of Goliath et al. away for peanuts to prevent a low ball offer in the £1-2 region then it is a VERY good deal.

But 75% that just F…..g hurts. Per definition.

Hopefully the pain will be worth it.

Ohh, and by the way, “moving from "Farm-in and potential JV" to "Havieron JV” that is mutual beneficial for both parties. So no winner, as there shouldn’t be in any good partnership.

Part 1.
TakingMyTime, are you trying to set a rhetoric trap for me here:-)

Have our share price increased because of the 2 deal’s announced on the 30th of November 2020.

Yes, it has.

But if it had been a different deal that had been announced, wouldn’t we have seen the same effect?

Could Greatland Gold have raised 50-60 million by selling 300 million shares in:

2016: NO.
2017: NO.
2018: NO.
2019: NO
2020: YES, I firmly believe, that with the share price we had around the 30th of November 2020, it could have been possible.

How would the market have reacted. Good question.

But two simplistic suggestions are as follows:

BUH HU HU: Yes we can now pay our share of the mine, but it cost us a dilution of an additional 300 million shares. And the share price falls.

YEAH HURAY: Yes we can now pay our share of the mine, and it only cost us a dilution of an additional 300 million shares. And the share price rises.

Personally I think, that had we raised 50-60 million, by issuing an additional 300 million shares, then most of the people who thinks the Juri-JV is fantastic, would also have said that this dilution deal was fantastic (and let it henceforth be known as the dilution deal that never took place)

So if that option was possible (and I strongly believe so) then there must be a reason it was not chosen.

It could be that we simply get to many shares in circulation.

Currently the official number is in the 3.8 Billion region.

PaddyGall has calculated that including all outstanding warrants the number is closer to 4.2 Billion.

Add an additional 300 million shares, from the deal that never took place, and you get 4.5 Billion.

4.5 Billion is by all accounts a high number, but only 300 million higher then the minimum 4.2 Billion we will end up with anyway.
Assuming all warrants are taken up.

Lets play around with some of Bamps figures a little bit, to but it in perspective.
I am going to round up and down, as it pleases me, to make the head calculations easy.
His 19.2 Billion, I’ll round up to 20 Billion and the exchange rate between the AUD and the £ is 2$ to 1£.

The 2 agreements announced on the 30th of November 2020 gives us a loan of U$50 million at 8% interest.
And on top of that, Newcrest will have to spend A$20 million on exploration in Black Hills and Paterson Range East within 5 years to earn 75% of those assets.

So to get U$50 million (loan only) + A$20 million from Newcrest we are giving them 15 Billion (75% of the 20 Billion mentioned above) and that is from Goliath alone.
Don’t forget there are other targets on the licenses that have similar geophysical characteristics to the Havieron gold-copper deposit.

From that perspective, no it is not a good deal.

So when I arrive at that conclusion, for my mental healths sake, I have to find a good reason why the BOD chose the option they did.

And the only option I have found so far, in that regard, is to see it as a hedge ag

Part 2

The best justification, I can think of, for such a decision, is either a direct or perceived threat against the independence of the company.

So no, I do not see the Juri-JV as a single deal. I see it as a complex deal, that is essential for the survival of Greatland Gold (again, it is the only way I can justify the deal)

Now if Newcrest has put some pressure/demands on Greatland Gold for this Juri-JV, how many out there believe Newcrest thinks the likelihood of dust or granite is going to be the outcome at Goliath?

Part 1
@TakingMyTime and Hydrogen.

Thanks for your replies.

And especially thanks for clearing up the confusion, regarding the right of first refusal.

Why?

The whys are the questions I keep coming back to.

Why the Juri-JV on those terms and why now.

And why not just put Goliath on the back burner for now.

I think every deal has to be justified when you are selling an asset.
And I like it even better, if it can also be considered a good deal for both parties.

And the Juri-JV can be considered a good deal.

But in my view only, if the main reason was to protect Greatland Gold’s independence.

The 75/25 split in Newcrest’s favour would properly have been a FANTASTIC result in 2017 when Greatland Gold had no money and no way of getting enough money.

But Greatland Gold are now in a position where we will be cash generating within just a few years, maybe even sooner.

And that will give Greatland Gold the opportunity to change dramatically.

And we now have Shaun Day from Northern Star on board.

Northern Star bought Paulsens Gold mine in the summer of 2010. That mine had been mothballed.
The team at Northern Star proved the previous owners wrong through further exploration.

Today Northern Star is the second largest gold miner in Australia. (and maybe the 8th biggest in the
world)
Top five gold mining companies of Australia profiled (nsenergybusiness.com)

In 2020 Northern Star made a merger with Saracen Mineral Holdings. With the combined operational mines they aim to be producing 2 million oz of gold by 2027 (up from 1.5 million oz)
Northern Star rising to Top-10 gold miner - North of 60 Mining News (miningnewsnorth.com)

That is quite an achievement in less then 10 years.

And while we’re talking about achievement, take a look at their share price performance since the summer of 2010 and up to January 2021.
0.090 AUD in August 2010 to 13.62 AUD as I write these lines.

With the hopefully 1st class tenements that Greatland Gold possesses in the hottest gold postcode, I was dreaming of seeing, that achievement mirrored over here, when we start to receive income from Havieron.

In my view the 3 main things you need to become a successful gold miner is: plenty of gold in the ground, a competent BOD and enough cash to get into production.
We already got 2 out of 3 and soon we will have the cash as well.

But if we keep on giving 75% of fantastic assets away, will we ever have enough gold to come up and compete with today’s majors, at some point in the future?

And if we were not to go down the route of becoming miners on our own, how great a merger deal can we get, when are no longer bringing 100% of a GIGANTIC asset to the table?

To me, those questions must have been considered by the BOD. And they reached the conclusion that giving Newcrest 25% of Goliath for pretty much just signing the dotted line of the Juri-JV and a further 50% for spending a few millions on proving it up, was

@Goggles

Thanks for your comment.

I am no lawyer, so hopefully there will be one on this BB that can clarify it for us.

My understanding of Newcrest first right of refusal is that, should Greatland Gold decide to sell a tenement that falls under this right, then Newcrest can match that offer. They do not have to come up with a better one. Just match it. And it is theirs to keep.

It is also my understanding that Greatland Gold is not under any obligation to sell any of their other tenements.

So this leads me to conclude that Greatland Gold can mine all their other tenement’s on their own, without offering them to Newcrest.

Hence why, if Greatland Gold was bought outright by another major with deep enough pockets to first pay of all the greatlanders and then still have enough money in the coffers to build a plant and start mining the tenement, then they can do so.

If however it was an investment bank that bought Greatland Gold, and wanted to sell the tenements, then I assume you are correct.
Newcrest would still be the one, who could just match the deal and walk away with the asset.

Are there any legal eagles out there who can help with a clarification?

@Bamps

Thanks for your reply.

It is some daunting numbers you put out there.

And as it stands today, no there is no way we could afford that.

And this rhetoric question might show how naive I am when it comes to mining.

Why explore it completely?

Why not just find a big spot, prove the concept, then make sure it is not a one of.

Simplistic viewed, if you have proved a big enough area and the grades are good enough to make it worth mining when you consider all the expenses that comes with it, then you are good to go.

For me, the main reason to prove it up completely would be if you intend on selling it, either in part or it’s entity.

If we were to mine it ourselves, we would just have to prove that the loan is secure against the asset.

If Goliath is as big as we dream it to be, I very much doubt that Newcrest will spend a Billion on proving it up, before they start mining it.

And that is another beauty to the Juri-JV. They do not have to.

Unlike the Havieron-JV there is no demand for a pre-feasibility study or MRE.
I have always seen that as a must, if they were to buy 5% from us at a fair market price.

I do not think Newcrest (and thereby us) will pulling any gold out of a mine at Goliath for the next 10 years. There will be plenty to do at Havieron and Scallywag.

And 5 years from now Greatland Gold will be a completely different company.

We will be cash generating for the first time in the company’s history (and hopefully have been so for a few years)

In that situation we can pay the bills for having the mine build or we can borrow, as long as the lender is confident their loan is more then secure.

So would it take longer to go it alone? YES

Would it take so much longer?
Well it depends, if Newcrest are happy with what Greatland Gold finds during the drill season of 2021 and starts a decline in 2022-2023, then by all means it is going to be much much faster then anything Greatland Gold could do.
But if Newcrest wont be pulling any gold out of the ground before 10 years from now, then going it alone would not have put us many years behind. 2-5 years maybe.

You are right, best thing is to be glad for what we got.

But here is the thing.

I can first truly be happy the day, I know it was a necessary deal to make to protect our independence.

Because when you start thinking that the income you will be generating in just a few years, can be put to good use, and create a huge mining company, because you already got the most fantastic asset.

Well those thoughts are what nightmares are made off.

PRE = Paterson Range East

@Bagpu55

Considering that Greatland Gold have had Firetower and Warrentina pretty much since day one and gradually have proven them up over the years without any hostile take over offers.

No, I do not expect they would have a huge influence on any decision making from a major.

Rudall has not been proven up yet, so I would attribute that with even less influence, despite it being in the hottest postcode possible.

With regards to PRE, Black Hills and Scallywag, Newcrest have the right to match any offer from a competitor and then be the one walking away with the asset.

But should a major offer to buy Greatland Gold outright then I assume that, that right disappear.
My understanding is, that it is only in the case of a sale of a tenement that Newcrest has the right to match the offer.
With new owners, a sale might not have to take place at all.
They could decide to mine the tenements themselves.

I have no doubt that Greatland Gold would have done some drilling at Goliath during 2021 under all circumstances.
If those drill results come back and have the slightest resemblance with Havieron, then I would say many a major would be a fool, not to try and convince the shareholders of Greatland Gold to part with their shares.

But with the Juri-JV in place (loss of 75%) and Greatland Gold now having debt, (50 million) it might be less appetizing.

And it it when I look at the JV agreement, from that perspective that I think it is an act of genius.

I fear to many would have been happy to let go of their shares at £1.

I have no doubt, that the share price will continue to rise over the next couple of years and that in just a few years, when we are mining, will be trading in several pounds and get dividends.

And that is were the true value lies.

Especially, if the prophecies about inflation are coming true.

We would receive a steady income and still maintain shares in an inflation secure asset.