Member Info for TakingMyTime

@Paddy "in my blood now"

I get that. It might not be as easy for me to sell completely as I think today.

"TMT's £40 prediction "

I guess I wasn't clear. That's a sale target, not a prediction. It's the point at which I would plan to say, "That's it." I have no idea whether we get there in 2030, 2035, after my death, or never. But if we do, I'm planning to cash out.

I gave my reasons for why I think we might get there, and I think they are reasonable, based on the macro economic situation and the track record of management. But it's not really a prediction.

@Malvolio "TMT, I'm intrigued by your £40 target. Is that an arbitrary figure or do you have a rationale for it? Genuinely curious."

Somewhat arbitrary. I expect Hav to more than double our current production, the cash we are producing from that to either develop EG or OC or purchase another major asset, and the price of gold to hit or exceed $10K. I think that takes us to £40 or higher.

I am also different from a lot in that this money doesn't really matter to me, it's just fun. And I think that most of the fun in staying in it will have been realized by the time we hit that SP. So I'll pull out and find something else fun to put it in, or several fun things. And they'll probably all flop. These kinds of runs tend to be a once in a lifetime thing.

This is a fun discussion.

For savvy investors this is a moving target. You look at what it's worth now compared to when you bought it, and whether the upside has significantly changed.

I first got in at 6p, then a lot more at 9p (old shares), more at 12p. By then, I had a final target of £1 ( £20 in today's shares).

It's not really the right approach but my conservatism means I really value being on a free carry. I shouldn't. I should compare the price today to where I think it is going. Silly of me, but if I can sell 1/3 or fewer and be on a free carry, I will do it, then hold the rest. It isn't optimal investing philosophy but it soothes my caution. If I can get to a free carry with fortunate trading without reducing my core holding, all the better. That typically only happens with a volatile share and sometimes some luck.

I do monitor my price target and move it if there are major events. Acquiring Telfer certainly moved my target. My ultimate target is now £40. If we hit that, I'm entirely out (unless there are more target-moving events, of course). A resource upgrade isn't a target mover. Finding another Hav, near enough to have infrastructure synergy, would be.

I do laddered profit-taking. I'll reduce my current position at £10 by 5%, the same at 15, 20, and 25. At £30, and £35, I'll sell 10%. Those points could change if there are target changing events, too.

All of that would change if I had a mortgage or wanted to spend on something important to me, or if family or a good friend could use funds for a good purpose. The point is not to maximise investments, the point is to maximise life. If there were good reason to access some of these funds, I'd sell now. There could be a point where I start to liquidate / give it away to reduce IHT impact, but I don't have anyone who needs it now and I'm not that old yet.

It's all very personal. What's your risk tolerance? What would you use it for if it weren't invested? Do you want to look for another investment? Do you enjoy making a bet on high risk / high reward opportunities or do you like a significantly derisked miner? How are things with your family? Anyone you would like to help? What's your IHT situation and does it matter to your family? These are different for everyone and they all go into the "right" decision. There usually are decisions that are "right" or "wrong" and few people think it through fully taking all the factors into account. But "right" for one person is "wrong" for another, and who cares if someone else decides differently from me? I just hope everyone thinks it through and does what is right for their circumstances / outlook.

@TT Just wanted to say thank you for finding and posting articles like this all the time. They often only say what informed investors already knew, but not always, sometimes there are bits of information or conclusions drawn that might have been missed.

You are doing a lot of people a favor by posting these, and it's worth saying thank you.

Expect more volatility. There is a huge difference between what the two sides are saying has been agreed. No guarantee the ceasefire holds for two days, let alone two weeks, and no guarantee it won't all kick off again. That's all likely to result in news reports that drag things down.

There's also volatility that comes from profit-taking. When a share hits an all time high, it hits the targets of long time holders. People who bought for less than £1 will be looking at this and saying, "Good enough for me to take some profit." They might only sell 10-25% of their shares, but there are bound to be people taking some profit, and congratulations to them.

And miners are always volatile, anyway. It's just part of the sector.

So we got a dip today, we'll see more. It's going to happen.

None of it matters if you are patient. Telfer is growing, Hav is coming, OC / tungsten is real, barring major black swan events gold is headed towards $6K and probably more this year, we have cash and no debt, acquisitions are likely coming and so are dividends. Profit taking today and more war news tomorrow, whatever, it isn't going to matter.

If you want to trade this, watch for the dips and take advantage of them. Don't be afraid to take profits from time to time, more dips will probably come. Just be aware this is going a lot higher and if you take profits, you may not get a dip below that level. Only trade if you don't mind taking a loss on some of your trades. Nothing is certain -- but the volatility is an opportunity if you have the money (and the guts) to make the risk of trading feasible for you. If you can't take a loss, don't do it, just hold.

Good luck all.

"What is the difference between anti semitic and anti Zionist I wonder TMT"

When you give a platform to someone who says Hitler had a "sacred mission", the difference is zero. You can dress it up as anti Zionist but it's antisemitism. When you say a guy who talks about a "Jew problem" in Europe before WWII is "the most important popular historian" you've become reprehensible, whatever worthwhile stuff you might have said in the past or might say on other topics. It's antisemitism.

And the difference is pretty small, anyway. Why should this particular ethnicity / culture / religion not have any right to a homeland and self-determination? What is it about them that justifies anti-Zionism? If it's not antisemitism, what is it that drives anti Zionism?

Over the last year Tucker Carlson has revealed himself to be a rabid antisemite. He gave a platform to Nazi apologist Darryl Cooper. He says Hitler "didn't have evil in his heart." He says Churchill was the "chief villain" of WWII. Hitler was a "prophet figure" with a "sacred mission to save the German people."

Carlson called Cooper "the most important popular historian" in the US today and gave him a platform. And now this thread has given Carlson a platform. Disgraceful.

And there are people who now give Carlson a platform (since he came out as an antisemite) who call Trump "Hitler". With no shame.

Gold is going up. The market generally is going up. The fall overnight was overdone. Oil price is dropping. Corrections often overshoot giving buying opportunities for those who want to trade.

The market freaked because Trump says one thing in one breath and another thing in another breath, and may do something completely different. As if that's news. Now, people are saying, "Wait a minute, that's not news." And so the correction is at least partially correcting.

@E1 All correct, as far as I can see. And that doesn't encompass the further resource updates to come, any revenue to come from nearology plays (whether we find more deposits, buy more deposits, or just process someone else's ore).

That also doesn't even talk about (though you have elsewhere) what happens from the impact of surging gold prices, which is virtually certain.

Nor the tungsten.

Nor our other projects.

Being optimistic doesn't make someone a ramper. Especially when there are so many reasons for optimism.

I got in solely because I believed Havieron is a monster. Then, we got lucky with Telfer, something I never expected, and then we got lucky again that they keep finding more gold there. My investment here has been used to impact several lives for good and I'm still playing with house money and still believe this has a long, long way to run.

@Lionel Sorry I misunderstood. Posting when tired, I guess.

"Shatters any dreams"?

Who is dreaming of titanium? Tungsten is a lot more valuable. Perhaps you've never misspoken or mistyped but for most of us, that kind of mistake is a common experience. How about if we just move on?

Now gentlemen, how do you know there's not titanium down there under the tungsten? LOL. I'll cut him some slack, it's the kind of mistake anyone could make.

@E1 "The only reason to value it that was to make a like for like comparison Tungsten vs gold in the ground."

Yep, that's why I said it was only a nitpick and your post wasn't a ramp. I've already labeled you as a deramper, LOL.

@speedy Interesting thoughts re: HNW. I worked closely with SMA managers for a long time who managed funds for a lot of these people. They typically are heavily into somewhat illiquid assets like gold (yes), real estate, private businesses / equity, etc. But as they get older, a lot goes into bonds as a defensive move, not as a moneymaker. Most won't rely heavily on PMs as their defensive investments at that phase of their life because PMs can be so volatile (as we've been observing).

"Hard to deny really. Is that a ramp?"

Not at all. Could nitpick a couple points, like this one: "you do realise GGP's new Tungsten deposit is worth about as much as its 15moz gold resource at, today's spot prices?"

Spot prices aren't the way to evaluate reserves. Our gold resources have lots of infrastructure already in place. Tungsten, not at all. So you can't really compare them. But it's only a nitpick -- it's a very valuable resource for us.

@Dip666 "I think Shaun made it pretty clear at the end of last year at the TH and in the related webinar that the team feels a JV or sale probably represents the smarter strategy for a company that itself has a great deal of development work to fund and manage ahead in its current principal area of business as a gold/copper miner."

That was then, this is now. The world has changed a lot since then and the demand for tungsten is going higher and higher with every day the war lasts. Maybe the devastation of China's allies (Venezuela, Cuba, Iran if anything ends up being left of the regime) will make them more negotiable on resources like tungsten, maybe less so. The price of tungsten could still skyrocket from here, and if it does, that could easily change the thinking of SD and the BOD.

We should never assume that plans made before major world-changing events won't/shouldn't change. One of the things we pay people like SD to do is reevaluate plans. He seems pretty good at that.

The problem with bonds is that the price is driven higher by investors who are not driven by getting a good return.

Ultra High Net Worth investors pour billions into bonds every year. They are extremely wealthy and want some of their money to last even if markets collapse. They don't actually care if they lose a few percent a year on their bonds due to inflation. Most who have a billion dollars / pounds have far more than they will ever spend. They'll stick half of it in bonds by the time they retire. If that half a billion becomes the equivalent of 450M over the next 15 years due to inflation eating it, so what? By the time they hit their 80s, they'll still have 450M, even if all their other investments go completely bad.

People like you and me can't afford to have inflation eat our assets like they can. They don't care about that, so they buy bonds anyway, which drives the price up (and the interest rate you can get on bonds down). For them, it's not about making money, it's about safety. They'll try to make money on their other investments.

Besides UHNW investors, there's also pension funds and insurance companies. Their actuaries project how much money they will need to pay out, and when, based on the projected lifespan of the pension recipients, life insurance holders, and projected property/casualty losses. They need regular cash flows that they can project, to be sure that they have those liabilities covered, and they need safety. They aren't really concerned about making extra money on those investments, they make their money on their fees. They are regulated, the regulators require them to buy government bonds. More money than any of us could count goes into government bonds from these sources every year.

These individuals and institutions push up the price of government bonds massively. That carries over into other bonds as well. The result is that if you invest in bonds, you are going to pay a high price for the safety, a high enough price that you are likely to not get enough to cover the inflation. It's sort of like taking cash and putting it in a safe. The cash is "safe" but it will lose value over time and you have to pay for the safe. That's what bonds are like. For some people, it's worth it. For many, it's not.

Just now, $12.78 / £6.69.

Rerate is rolling. This is happening with gold still well off its highs.

More and more analysts are getting around to processing the resource updates and telling their portfolio managers, "Better buy now." The increases this week surely take lots of insto money rolling in. And because we just dropped, those who were likely to take profit at this level already did so, so lots of shares in sticky hands.

If gold goes back above $5K, I expect to blow through our ATH. Once it starts hitting $6K or higher, which it should by the end of the year, you might be looking at £9-10. There will be some profit taking at that level but the resources are likely to be growing by then, too.

The massive money pouring in to sustain this price rise is being invested at today's gold price. Institutional investors are not going to be less interested when the gold price rises.

Enjoy the ride, everyone.

Jet, all the best to you.

BR is definitely not short as of the time of the RNS.

For someone to go short, they have to loan shares to someone else, who is long. The RNS says they are the long party, not the short party. They are betting that Jane Street is going to get hurt with their short and BR is going to make money off of it. They wouldn't even remotely consider entering into that agreement if they thought the share was going to drop or were considering trying to manipulate it to drop. It's a strong bullish position to take.