Member Info for TakingMyTime

@Davielad "I will make sure you are ok lol"

Where I come from, when someone says that, then it's really time to be afraid. ;)

This price is a bargain. Missed the opportunity a month ago because funds weren't free. Still expecting very strong recovery here, will double my money on today's buy, willing to wait for it for a few years if necessary.

Always figured I might top slice at 650, but I'm wavering on that. Might hold everything until 700. I think it would have to push close to 1000 before I'd sell out completely. I like this company. I think the demerger, if it goes ahead, will be a good thing, too.

LOL, Davielad, I think I'd be afraid in Glasgow, too!

@Freddie
"you were doing so well untill the last paragraph , now it seems you are paid to say such things"

DYOR, right? What research justifies the accusation that he's a paid ramper as opposed to an enthusiastic/optimistic investor?

In fact, his last sentence is spot on. It doesn't matter whether you believe the allegations of manipulation or not, if you just hold your shares.

@Tymers "I to question particularly finance and not one investor has been in a position to respond as such keep questioning"

Not been here a lot recently. What are you questioning? I missed it.

@nevergone
1. I'm invested for the long term, not trading.
2. Not sure how you could be causing me trouble even if I were trading. I'd be responsible for reading the market and making my own decisions, whatever you say or do.
3. I grew up in an area of Jamaica that people here wouldn't visit on holiday. I know what aggressive is -- that wasn't it.
4. It was actually just a rather daft joke because I thought the contrast between what you said and your chosen screen name was a little bit funny. I still do.
5. I've learned some things through life about people who see aggression when none was intended, but I don't know enough about you to put you into any of those categories, so I will maintain my open mind about you. Perhaps that will make you feel better or perhaps you won't care either way. I recommend the latter.

Good luck with your trading, investing, or trolling, whichever you are here for. None of them will have any impact on me.

"I am completely honoured a thread was created in my absence."

How could it be "in your absence" if you are nevergone?

Freddie, if you want to read up on AISC, here's a resource. https://www.gold.org/about-gold/gold-supply/responsible-gold/all-in-costs

Pretty important to understand if investing in a producer, or in an explorer with an actual find.

Sorry, Prof, that's not right.

You are correct that the Tropicana deal was $852 / oz and in Australia.

Let's just assume for giggles that we sell our share of Hav for the same price. $852 / oz. You were doing great up through multiplying £185 by a million to reflect 1 moz. You now have £185 million. But then the Aussie government will say, "Congratulations. This has been a wildly successful exploration, you've made a profit of £185 million. And we're having 30% of that because that's corporation tax on your profit."

Our accountant says, "Well, we had some expenses, you know," and they say, "Sure, deduct them, by all means." So the net result might be that our profit (for tax purposes) is something like £180 million per moz. They'll take 30% of that (£54 million) before anything comes back to shareholders. Your moz is now worth £126 million, which takes you to about 3.1p / share.

The $852 / oz is a pre-tax price. The transaction will get hit by corporation tax.

@Prof
It's a blunt instrument indeed. You can make it a little sharper by deducting 30% from your 4.4p / moz, to reflect the corporation tax that the Aussie's would rudely insist we pay. That would put you at around 3.1p.

But it will still be a blunt instrument, and probably understate our value if we hold it and mine, rather than sell it.

@RetiredBanker
Thanks for the thoughtful post. It's an interesting thought -- that PSN is too successful and it makes you nervous. I can't say I've ever thought that, but it's something for all investors in PSN to consider, I suppose.

Have you looked into why PSN is so much more profitable than the others? I've assumed a big factor is very good strategic use of their land bank. Others include no debt, the ability to pay cash allowing them to negotiate better deals, targeting the low end of the market allowing them to use non-premium priced materials, etc.

If there are good and understandable reasons for the higher profit it's a shame to miss the opportunity. If there aren't, we should be nervous. I admit I've not pushed very hard on why, I've just said, "Wow, look at the profit, they're doing a great job!"

I see we cross-posted, VS. Thanks for clarifying.

VS, are you saying you were responsible for the post being removed, and apologising? If so, apologies accepted.

There's a big difference between filtering people and silencing people. The one, you decline to listen to someone or their ideas, and everyone should have the right to choose that. The other, you decide that they are to be silenced. That should require a much higher threshold, don't you think?

ATB

@Strummer
When one's been through what I've been through in the last 6 months, "shameful treatment" on a chat forum is pretty meaningless.

Seems like LSE is putting themselves at risk. When you silence negative voices, and even those who are willing to engage with negative voices, if this all goes pear-shaped....

It does make one wonder about staying engaged here.

@jack
"Your summary of TMT's post is a deliberate mis-representation of his meaning. The post is a message to 'de-ramper hunters' that all this stuff is doing more harm than good and makes the board an unpleasant place to be. IMHO there is NO such thing as a 'negato crew' as you have just put it."

No. It's an accurate representation of part of my meaning. There certainly is a 'negato crew', IMO, maybe paid derampers as hydro thinks or maybe just trolls/attention seekers, but they are there. And part of my meaning is the best way to refute them is with the facts of the investment case, which hydro picked up on.

You have accurately represented the other part of my meaning, that the heresy hunting is counterproductive and contributing to the destruction of the board.

Cool. Orwell's 1984 has arrived on the GGP board at LSE.

Yes, very interesting. I viewed the restart as short-term mildly bearish but not really changing the mid-term and long-term dynamics. We always knew it was going to restart sometime. A month or two earlier than I expected hardly changes things much, but might give a short term buying opportunity that could convince me to add here.

I still think PSN is one of the best positioned. I think that the economic hit of covid is not yet fully felt and that we're going to see major tax rises. That's more likely to hit the top end of the market than the lower-priced segment. I still think the housing shortage means that the lower-priced segment of the market will be supported in various ways by the government.

So I'm still heavily in PSN, I think our run still has a ways to go. I'll probably top slice somewhere around 3500 but this will continue to be a significant piece of my portfolio for some time to come, I expect.

Hi, GerryJo. No one can predict short-term reaction. My view (posted 29 March) on the long-term ramifications:
IS THIS ABOUT A RIGHTS ISSUE OR A PLACING?
This is not about a rights issue. Resolution 4 at the AGM, which was passed, allowed a rights issue.

This might be about an external placing but it doesn't have to be. This just gives the BOD the right to issue shares. They can issue them to a drilling company to pay for drilling. They can issue them to employees in lieu of cash salaries. They can issue them to the shareholders of another company as full or part payment in an acquisition of part or all of the other company. Or they can issue them to an outside investor (a corporation like Newcrest, an institutional investor, or a very wealthy individual) for cold, hard cash.
DOES THIS MEAN THERE WON'T BE A RIGHTS ISSUE?
No. It means if they have a good reason to issue shares at these levels, they can do so quickly without a rights issue or consulting with shareholders.
HOW MUCH CAN THEY ISSUE?
Up to 5% for capital expenses or an acquisition, PLUS up to 5% for general expenses.
WILL THEY USE THIS RIGHT?
They had this right last year and used it to issue some share options. Chances are, they will use it on a small scale. Whether they use it on a larger scale probably depends on the opportunities that arise. The RNS states there is no definite intent to use it at this point in time but obviously, they can foresee situations where it would be useful, and it is something they want in their toolbox.
HOW MUCH COULD IT HURT THE SHARE PRICE?
Well, IF THE AUTHORITY IS USED it's dilution, but it is extremely unlikely to be naked dilution. They aren't going to just give the shares away, they will be getting something for them -- drilling, cash, an acquisition, whatever. So whatever it is should either increase the value of the company or (if used for something like drilling) have the potential to increase the value of the company. So it is unlikely to be significantly negative to the SP -- but it depends on how it is used.

If the full 10% is used, it means that your shares will constitute a reduced percentage of the ownership of the company, by 10%. If a placing for 10% were done and it did absolutely nothing for the value of the company (no acquisition, no cash, nothing), it would reduce the theoretical value of your shares by 10%. That is an extremely unlikely scenario, of course. More likely is it would increase the value of the company between 5-10% and so would have a negligible effect on the value of your shares.

But it's worth remembering that we've just seen the SP drop by 50% in recent weeks, so a potential 2-3% impact from a placing, if it were to happen, rather pales in significance.
WILL TMT SUPPORT THIS?
Yes. I believe it gives the BOD valuable flexibility. Resolution 5 had my support in December and I support this. I trust them enough to trust that they will only do this if it adds significant enough value to justify it