Member Info for TakingMyTime

MTM, nice comment, in general I agree. One question.

You said your price target is 700p. Care to give a horizon for when you expect it to reach that level? 1 year? 3 years? 5 years?

It's absolutely true that retail can change quickly. No doubt there's a potential downside.

Primark has proven flexible enough to successfully crack multiple markets. M&S were rigid and so their formula was successful until the market changed. Primark's flexibility suggests they are less vulnerable than M&S ever was, and thus the likelihood of the downside materialising is, in my view, not particularly high.

There's a huge growth opportunity in the US which Primark is only beginning to exploit. The potential upside here, in my view, overwhelms the potential downside.

Primark has succeeded by undercutting the competition on price, and now they own the in-store low-price market. A huge segment of the population loves in-store low-price shopping. For someone to take that market away, they either have to be located more conveniently than Primark or beat Primark on price. Otherwise, creatures of habit will keep shopping where they have shopped in the past.

I think it's going to be extremely difficult for a competitor to be cheap enough to steal Primark shoppers. Once brand loyalty exists, you've got to win on price by enough to overcome it. The margins aren't there to do that, unless someone with very deep pockets decides to lose money for a long time to gain market share. I don't see that happening.

So the only way I can see for a competitor to steal Primark shoppers is to be comparable on price and better on location. But since Primark has so many prime locations nailed down, that's going to be a long, slow process of finding a great location, then another, then another. And I'm not sure someone with the finances to do that would decide that fighting Primark is the best way to invest their money.

I think Primark is here to stay, and has massive room for growth world-wide. If it fails, it is more likely to fail from inside through poor management, poor investment, poor product choice, than from outside. And so far I see no reason to expect the current management to fail.

All the above is only my opinion, of course. I could be reading the situation wrong, but that's my view.

"Shakespeare is sublime, but if you want to know Caesar read his own writings "

This may be entirely true but then Shakespeare was never trying to write history, anyway. He was writing to entertain and to find within his readers / theatre audiences an answering chord as to the makeup of human nature. He wanted to find that which was authentic to his audience, rather than that which was historically accurate.

In exploring human nature, Shakespeare was GGP. In expounding history, he was WSBN at best. ;)

(with apologies to those here who hold WSBN)

"Kall, Javid has COVID and been double jabbed, mild symptoms reportedly."

Yes, the jab does not provide guaranteed or full immunity. What it does provide is much greater immunity, and where the subject does catch it, lesser symptoms and less risk of passing it on.

Kall is right that there is likely to be no need for lockdown. Whether the politicians will see it that way or whether they will be driven by fear and inflict another lockdown on people remains to be seen. Hopefully they will balance the costs of lockdown in human suffering, substance abuse, suicides, and poverty vs the Covid risks. But I'm doubtful.

In the long run, I don't think further lockdowns hurt this share. Temporarily, it means less revenue/profit, but it also drives more competitors out of the market, and ABF is going to survive another lockdown, if it comes. Another lockdown would be terrible but probably in the long run increase Primark's market share. I'm very comfortable with this investment.

I'm about to enter a new phase of life that will make it hard for me to actively research my investments, but this is one I will likely continue to hold for a long time.

@tiggerman "a gorgeous 17 year old from Jamaica"

People from Jamaica are always gorgeous. This is one of the great facts of life.

If anyone cares, they could email Greatland Gold or Newcrest and ask. Just saying.

Honestly, who cares what anyone wants as to selling or holding the 25%? Surely the only time to intelligently discuss it is if an offer is made? Surely if the offer were high enough even the staunchest supporter of holding would be happy to sell, and if the offer were low enough the strongest advocate of selling would like to hold.

So trying to pin down what someone wants on the subject is pretty irrelevant, isn't it? I want to hold the 25%, but if NCM or someone else decided to offer £5 billion, I think I'd find the humility to say, "I was wrong, sell, baby, sell! Pay us a £1 special dividend and use the rest to drill!"

"You'll never forgive me for this; but religion's been around a long time, too."

Ha! Religious charlatans just as long, too.

I'm not sure you need forgiveness for pointing that out, though, nor even sure you were asking for it. But since you went there, I'll just add that any religion that would deny forgiveness to ANYONE who truly wants it is worse than worthless.

ATB

"Crypto in its many forms will be here far longer than you will be ."

So will the Nigerian princes who keep sending me emails about how much money they have to give me and the Microsoft reps with dodgy accents who keep phoning me about my computer and the politicians who want my vote so they can tax my money to buy more votes all in the interests of their own power and wealth.

Perhaps crypto is more reliable than those, but longevity is no evidence of anything.

"But "sourcery," as a new word, meaning mistaken use of sources, deserves a place in the dictionary."

I must disagree. "Sourcery" obviously means "searching for new sources of much-needed material" and is what NCM has been doing re: Telfer.

Thus, this seemingly off-topic discussion has been dragged forcefully (and against its own wishes) back into relevance.

@JTB "About a week ago, TakingMyTime mentioned 'subterranean rodents'. It's had me spooked ever since."

I've been told I caused nightmares before, but mostly that was back in high school when I'd ask a pretty girl out. This is much more gratifying.

@TT I now see you said the exact same thing I just said.

When will I learn to read an entire thread before responding?

I like to think I'm not stupid but sometimes I do my best to prove the contrary. Perhaps the board will kindly avert their collective eyes from my last post and forget it happened.

@TT "With respect there is unlikely to be anything new which would be seen as market sensitive material. That would have to come from a RNS, initially at least."

Unless....

Unless there's an RNS coming in the next few days and he wants a forum to answer questions about it after it drops.

It's probably just "we need to up our communication so some of these hand-wringing PIs don't sell out for emotional rather than sound-investment decisions. Let's do an occasional Q&A!"

Which is ok with me.

@OM
Your post would have been a great response next time Jackie shows up (which will undoubtedly happen, it's a repeated pattern). To pop it up now just seemed like a gratuitous slam to me, and obviously did to others as well.

Good content, wrong context, IMO. Hold your fire for when he/she shows up to disrupt again, or when some other cross-ramper does the same thing. It's a great example.

"Thats fine, I guess this isnt the place to do any research as people aren't very friendly, it's just sometimes its much quicker to ask a simple question on a forum about the subject that to trawl through other sites."

You're right, it is. So if you say "I'm a casual investor and trying to learn more, what's the connection with Byrnecut?", you'd get a good response.

If you add an evaluative statement that you've lost confidence in a company's ability to dig holes because they aren't good at web design, you'll get little respect. Most people understand that these are skills that do not overlap.

And Byrnecut is not marketing their skills to people who use Google to find them. They wouldn't even have to have a website at all. They are world leaders and everyone who uses their services knows about them without a website.

Good luck with your investments and your research. You may only be a casual investor in GGP but, in my view, that casual investment was a good move on your part, even if you didn't fully understand it. Personally, I try to use fewer investments and research them a little more thoroughly so I mostly understand what is happening, but to each his own.

@StarBright "He has overlooked a couple of massive points - taxes and the time taken to mine."

He has indeed. I totally agree with you and find his model deeply flawed.

Thank you for disclosing your discount rate for your Discounted Cash Flow model. Perhaps not everyone here understands what you are doing but I do and it's not a million miles away from how I view the asset.

In my view, however, given the current market conditions and the political environment, expecting a 10% discount rate to hold over the next 5 years (or longer) is nonsensical. Once we're in production this will be a very, very low risk investment. And it is a mistake to say that the discount rate is personal preference. The discount rate is simply a reflection of how the market is going to value future profits. The market will decide and the value will be set accordingly.

It is true that it is a personal preference as to how conservative one wants to be, and so what discount one wants to use. But it's either a little disingenuous or a little deceptive to imply that you are giving a real valuation when you are using a discount rate that is considerably higher than the market is likely to use in valuing GGP once the gold starts to come out of the ground.

Obviously, if you used a discount rate of 8-10% for the next 18 months and then a rate of 3% thereafter, it would have a huge impact on your valuations, compared to 10% throughout. Under what real world scenario do you really think the market is going to use a 10% discount in valuing GGP?

Congratulations to them! Some nice intercepts.

None come close to 85m @ 11 g/t, of course. But still some nice results.

Adrian, thank you very much for such a nice post. ATB

@Adrian "There are some brilliant and helpful posters on here but like many of these BB's they don't suffer fools"

Would be nicer, however, if we could consistently learn to not suffer folly, and at least give the fools a helping hand to learn, if they are willing. Or it could be said, play the ball and not the man. Or even, 'You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.'

This is an interesting move. Does anyone who is commenting on this actually know anything about Mr Toon beyond what is in the RNS? Anyone looked up his history as to when he was at those various companies, his role, and what happened at those companies during his tenure? Why are we so sure this is a good appointment?

What's interesting, in my view, is the timing. We're not at a point where, it appears, we are spending significant money, receiving significant money, or cranking up hiring. So why do we need a CFO at this phase in our development? Is it just because Shaun was a CFO so he thinks every company should have one? That's an expensive luxury.

Possible substantive reasons:
1. To oversee the necessary compliance to get listed on ASX, TSX, or move into the FTSE. This, though expensive, would be a positive move in my view as it would probably open us up to further II investment and also probably broader PI investment.
2. The decline is actually moving faster than some dare to hope and we are hitting the top of the ore body this calendar year. If that actually happens, it probably makes sense to get a CFO in place soon.
3. There are significant capital transactions (asset disposals, acquisitions, or mergers) on the near horizon and SD understandably wants another trained set of eyes on things. You could pay a consultant to do that kind of thing but if you expect to do it not once or twice, but keep doing it, you get a CFO.

There may be other reasons in view, but I suspect one or more of those is in the works, and that's why we need a CFO now. If so, it's only positive for the SP that we're adding a CFO, and I like the fact of the appointment.

But I know nothing about whether this particular appointment is a good one or not. If anyone has any knowledge of him or has done any real research on him, I'd be glad to see it. Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to do so myself right now.