Member Info for TakingMyTime

"Why has ii (institutional investors) not piled in"

I suggest you research investment strategies, especially contrarian or value investing. If you don't want to invest in that way, if you are more a growth or momentum investor, then I'd suggest that this is not the time for you to be investing in ABF.

I personally believe the most money is to be made on companies that the IIs are not piling in and are out of favour with the market, but where the company is strong and there is reason to believe in a bright future. But many people don't have the stomach for that because it can take a while, even if the evaluation of the company is right, for the market to catch up. And of course, you can get the evaluation of the company wrong. To succeed, you have to make sound evaluations of the companies and have the patience to wait for it to come good, and be willing to buy and hold even when the institutions aren't piling in.

If you wait until the institutions have piled in, you have much less upside, because when they pile in the SP rises.

Your questions here suggest you don't understand this kind of investing, which suggests this may not be the best investment for you. Good luck whatever you decide.

@Bamps
You're usually more right than I am, and I do hope that pattern holds this time. :)

Mickey, haven't listened yet. Hope you are right, not expecting it personally.

@Hydro
I liked your first version better, mate, much more entertaining!

If December's MRE is 10 moz, it will be time to bring out that rocket, except that rockets don't go fast enough. I'll be absolutely shocked (pleasantly) if it's more than 7 moz.

I don't think Alpala is a worthwhile comparison, because 1) this MRE is being done by someone who actually knows what they are doing 2) I suspect JORC is rather more demanding than the Ecuadorean equivalent.

Not sure why the criticism of RacingCyclist in this thread. His comment was pure fact. SD was not the CEO. He saw how it was done and was part of all decision-making in the building of that company but he was not deemed by them to be the right man for CEO at the time and he did not call the shots in building that company.

GGP is acting on the assumption that, having seen how it was done from inside and being right next to the top, he can duplicate it here. It's a reasonable assumption but it's not guaranteed and it would be foolish to pretend otherwise.

"Im expecting around 12 to 15Moz in the MRE in December issue. Do the maths."

Please don't expect that or encourage others to. There's not been sufficient infill drilling to justify that, and we're focused on growth drilling now.

Do you remember how much infill drilling they had to do to get to the initial MRE? Then, they did infill drilling which will take us from inferred to indicated. Where's that level of infill drilling been taking place outside the MRE envelope?

This MRE is unlikely to grow significantly until the exploration decline is finished and they can do the infill drilling at a significantly reduced cost from underground, IMO.

If December's update takes it to 6 moz that would be superb. Anything over 5 moz would get us into Tier 1, by many definitions.

12-15 moz is highly likely to happen, and IMO perhaps significantly more. But it's not happening in December.

Caveat: I've never invested in this kind of project before so my inexperience may be tripping me up here. But I don't think my research on this is lacking and I don't expect to be wrong on this one.

So, share your research. Who, and why?

Recognising:
1. Anyone besides NCM buying out GGP will be a junior partner at Havieron. What other entities are going to pay in excess of £1 billion for the privilege of being a junior partner?
2. It will cost NCM undoubtedly in excess of £1 billion. Why should they pay that when they already will own 70% without paying out huge amounts of money?
3. If you think NCM is one of the entities, why didn't they do it last summer when they surely could have had it for 25-30p / share? Why did they provide financing in the Hav JV when they could have put the squeeze on and got a good buyout price then?
4. How could any outsider know what the BOD of 3 mining majors will decide?

Don't play the game of "I know something is going to happen" without backing it up. We've seen that before. You don't want to be Joe Bass. Share the research and the names, and how you know.

I suppose, compared to Glitter, I am a deramper, LOL. But then, so are Hydro, Spy, and Bamps -- compared to Glitter.

"Find it kind of strange someone would assume they do on bulletin board but each to their own."

I would find it strange for someone to deduce that assumption from my comment -- unless he were trolling.

"Sorry to break it to you old boy. I really do see straight through you… maybe TMT could have a sympathetic, guiding, private word, or something?"

LOL. Sorry, hydro. I might be able to help him if he wanted help but he seems content with himself the way he is. Well, maybe not content, exactly, but you know what I mean.

@codders, if it costs nothing to be polite when you have to kill a man, it costs even less when he's (this time, at least) mostly correct. ATB to you.

@codders "If you LTH are so certain it's going to be 50p-60p £1 in the next year, why are you all so concerned that it might drop to say 15p for a short while...? "

I don't often agree with you but you are mostly right on this. The answer, though, is that PIs (and sometimes fund managers, too, TBH) get emotionally involved and so don't like the drops, even if they believe in the LT value.

There's one other problem with short term drops. They increase the risk of a below-value buyout. I don't think they significantly increase that risk, because a buy-out offer concentrates the mind wonderfully, not on short-term price movements and charts, but on underlying value. And a too-low buy-out offer is likely to trigger rival bids. So while the risk is real I don't think it is a significant risk.

For tax reasons, since I intend to be transferring most or all of these shares to family in the near future, I'm happy to see a low SP, if it materialises. 15p would see me making significant moves. But in general, because of the takeover risk, I'd consider it not best for shareholders to have that low SP, even if they are LTH who believe the value is much higher.

There's also, of course, the risk that someone suddenly needs to access funds and is forced to sell. It would be a shame if someone were forced by life events to sell at a SP of 15p.

For these reasons, from a strictly selfish perspective, a major SP drop would help me, but in a general context, a low SP is probably not detrimental for most LTHs but mostly not the best.

@Bamps
"Then there are 2 side drills
133W1 length 1674m
133W2 length 1545m
Assay pending but the lengths where are they heading that’s 268m and 139m away from the sulphides"

I'd really, really like to see the results on those two.

Reasonably good results, IMO. Nothing immense like HAD133 last time, nothing that makes you say, "Maybe Bamps is too conservative."

But looks to me like everything is still hitting mineralisation and we're still open at depth and everywhere else. So, all fine by me.

@Lenz "just don't like the CEO putting up something like thunderbirds are go"
With all due respect, you need to learn to read things in context.

Some guy on Twitter put up one more day with Thunderbird 1. SD replied that it wasn't the next day, it was Thursday, and put up Thunderbird 2. He was saying, "Mate, 2 days, not 1." He wasn't saying the SP would blast off or the results would launch, he was correcting the guy's mistake of one day when it was 2.

People here who want the SP to blast off read into it what they wanted, rather than what he was really saying. Sounds like you fell into the same tramp. But SD was not ramping, he was having fun with some guy who had his facts wrong.

"Would SD not have Aussie II Contacts?"
There are not many borders in institutional investing. Aussie IIs can invest pretty much anywhere in the world, and certainly in London. Some here will remember NCM putting on a big investor presentation in the US last year. This is a non-issue. If he's got a contact and convinces them to invest, they'll be able to without trouble.

"See it for what it is, not what it might be. IMO"

Suggest you avoid investing in gold exploration, then. There's no point in you being here unless you think it might be / likely will be / certainly will be more than "what it is."

@laurenloise "Thunderbird 2 has rescue equipment and is sent to disaster sites......

!!!!!!!!!"
You think it is coming to rescue you? I wouldn't have called you a disaster site, but you and millions of others can't be wrong, I guess.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. My interest in investing in uranium is relatively recent and I'm pretty sure you understand the market more than I do, so I appreciate it.

I put a lot of money into shares in March/April 2020. One I looked at and decided not to pull the trigger was Kingfisher. Probably my biggest mistake. I'm not sure there's really the same upside there now but still might be a pretty good long term play.