Member Info for TakingMyTime

"As a separate issue, relating to GGP-NCM (and not the instance where they are bought out), the original farm-in RNS states that the details of the toll mining have yet to be finalised...bit of wiggle room then for NCM to do the hokie pokie."

Nope. "Tolling principles" are agreed. That will mean there's a formula for determining the price that has been agreed, too. It will include variables such as the grade of the ore, as well as adjustments for costs such as electricity, etc, if those costs vary significantly from today. It's not a specific price that has been agreed because there are too many variables, but the principles are agreed.

You got nothing. Take your deramping elsewhere. You aren't invested here and you don't even want to be.

@Miagi, you're right, thanks for enlightening me. There's maybe 10 moz of Au in the ground there, maybe even more, plus loads of Cu, and the only company interested in it is NCM. Nobody else wants it.

NCM has us over a barrel. We never thought about the toll-processing charges when we negotiated the thing, those charges certainly must not be in the agreement. That would require forethought, something our BOD obviously isn't capable of. So NCM can mess us over and they can anyone to whom we sell our share because our BOD are idiots. Nobody even thought about the toll processing at all, or if they did, they were too stupid to reach an agreement on price. Thanks for providing this board with your "common sense."

I'm sure you are right that no competitor will offer to buy our share, if for nothing else than to force NCM to pay a fair price for it. They would gladly see NCM force us into a desperation sale and buy our share for $25 / oz or less.

You also must be right that NCM doesn't care what juniors think about them because juniors can't decide to enter JVs with anyone else. It's NCM or nobody. No junior will ever say, "If that's the way NCM treats juniors, we won't JV with them, we'll go to Rio, or Barrick, or Newmont." NCM just won't care about their reputation, they don't have to. Gold juniors are all really slaves to their whims. Wish you'd dropped GH a line a little earlier, but I guess it wouldn't matter, he'd have had to go with NCM anyway, right? He's a slave. Your "common sense" was so needed on this board, thanks!

Sorry about your Solgold. I'd have never bought it because of the incestuous board relationship, personally, but to each his own. They've got a great asset if it ever comes out of the ground. You do realise that it isn't NCM that is trying to get the whole board replaced, don't you? Seems like Cornerstone thinks the problem is Solgold, not Newcrest. Interesting, that one, don't you think?

@spoon, in the context, perhaps you could have edited it again so it would be three comments in a row. ;)

@Nige, thanks, will give it a look.

@ilikehousebuilders, I read it as suggesting there might be a special dividend before the end of the year (because of the cancelled dividend this year). I would definitely expect regular dividends once a year next year. I would be surprised if there is also a special dividend next year, I expect the Board to hold fire on that for a year to see how things go with Brexit, etc. This is all, of course, only my opinion. But if so, it suggests only one dividend next year, not two.

The term has usage in IT and other contexts and no one is talking about exterminating the gold in Havieron nor is there anything that anyone has said that is even remotely linked to the Holocaust. Nor is it being used in a way that diminishes the Holocaust. It is common words being used in an ordinary way, and just because the same words were used by perverse wicked people to mean something horrible doesn't mean the words have somehow become unclean.

It is not an aberration to use the words in their normal sense. The aberration was to use them the way the Nazis used them. It's better to reclaim the words by using them appropriately than to let a Nazi cloud take over language.

@Miagi "Those of weak intellect tend to play the man rather than the ball."

Those of weak intellect try to play the ball without knowing where the man is or where he is going.

That said, in response to your points:
1) The major only calls the shots when the junior is hostage. If the junior can just go talk to another major, the major has to be reasonable.
2) Of course other majors would be glad to own a 25% interest in a Tier 1 asset. You talk as if JVs between majors never happen. Barrick and Newmont started a large JV in Nevada. And of course NCM would be happy to do the toll processing at Telfer for a Hav JV, no matter who owns the rest of it. The Hav JV will pay them a nice fee that keeps the Telfer operation profitable for a long time to come, extending the mine life. You obviously don't understand what Hav means to Telfer or how the JV relates to Telfer. That means you probably don't have enough understanding of NCM / Telfer / Hav to be able to say much of value here.

Weird. "share" hyphen "exchange" got filtered

Hi, Bamps. The danger of a merger and the danger of a buyout at too low a price are basically the same, with the Australian shares factor an added complexity.

You can hold Aussie shares in an ISA if your ISA provider allows Aussie shares. I believe IG and ii are the two main ones that do. I hope, if a ************** merger took place, that the resulting company would list on both exchanges.

The risk of a too-low buyout or a merger is one reason I bought NCM. If it happened, it would (at least in the long run) be a boost to NCM. It won’t gain me as much as it would if proper value were received for GGP, but it at least hedges the risk for me somewhat. And I saw NCM as good value anyway, a good way to increase my exposure to gold.

@Jambo & Bully
You both posited a scenario where NCM doesn't play nice.

I have two answers to that which I think are both compelling.
1. NCM wants a good reputation with juniors because they like farm-ins and JVs. The souring of the Solgold relationship could hurt them in that regard, especially if followed up with a breakdown with GGP. Juniors will look for deals with other majors if NCM decide to try to take advantage of us.
2. Barrick, Rio, etc. If NCM tries to tie us in knots, we can always go find what others will pay for our share of Hav. I guarantee NCM would rather not have that happen.
The third answer isn’t as strong as those two but also helps. We have other tenements that could be very attractive to NCM to JV with us. It might be very short-sighted to mess us around.
My only concern here is that someone buys out the entire company for a price that maybe isn’t full value for the assets we hold. But if it happens, shareholders will walk away with a really nice return on investment, anyway – just maybe not as good as it could have been.

@TT
You articulate your argument well. And I certainly agree NCM would like to own it all, though they don't have 100% ownership of Red Chris and Wafi-Golpu. I expect they'd make an offer. They'll want to tread carefully, because they won't want to trigger a bidding war with Rio or Barrick coming out the winner, either for Hav or for all of GGP.

But ultimately it comes down to the price. It has to be high enough to satisfy GGP that it is good value but low enough to satisfy NCM of a good return on investment. With so much unknown, can a price be found that satisfies both? If not, it's no deal, because we are in the enviable position of not having to accept an offer. We can take it all the way and hold our 25% if the offer isn't good enough.

I was primarily responding to the "we're an exploration company" argument, though. You can be an exploration company sitting on a cash cow and using it to fund your exploration. Most exploration companies don't have that option but we do. That's the great thing here -- there's no gun to our head. There are many ways we can "win" out of this scenario, and the BOD will have the responsibility to choose the best one, unless someone comes in with a hostile bid -- then we'll decide.

That's all.

There’s no reason an exploration company can’t own an income-producing asset which covers the annual cost of exploration. It’s a great place for an exploration company to be. The idea that we have to sell all of Hav because “we’re an exploration company” is not sound. Of course we could hold onto a percentage, maybe only a small percentage, to fund all future exploration.

Whether we SHOULD sell all of Hav or retain part of it depends on two things. The first is whether the entire company is bought out, which renders it moot.

The second thing, if the company is not bought out, is how much is offered for our share. If the BOD believe that the offer on the table is sufficient for our share of Hav, they’ll sell. If they don’t, they won’t. Shareholders don’t have to be asked and probably won’t be.

@Matty "(At least they acted after I reported him so that should be applauded)."

Well, I was annoyed. I spent all that time trying to find his post to report it and it had disappeared, LOL.

"I am on a no commission platform"
You do realise there's no such thing. They are making their money off you somewhere. Probably on the spread. They aren't a charity.

Nope. When they remove a post that starts a thread, it removes all replies to it. His post needed to be removed because it was dishonest. So your responses went away, too, it's the way the forum works. The whole thread goes. The moderators did the right thing.

So just say it here. Scoutt lied about how many shares Gervaise Heddle has sold. No one should believe anything he says.

I think getting other people's take on what was said has merit. But I do think it would be healthy for GGP investors to recognise that SB won't boost us every time he opens his mouth, that he's glad to work with us but has his own agenda, and it's not the same as ours. Right now Hav is not making any money at all for NCM shareholders, and is not the most important thing to them.

I understood why the new brokers might have held off until after the NCM results before releasing a broker note on GGP, but I never understood the assumption that this was going to be a market moving day.

SB will say the things that he thinks will help NCM, not the things that we think will help GGP. Our interests may walk side by side at times but it's not an altruistic relationship.

@Blantyre "TmT; Not really interested what you would expect or deem to be Gervaise's thoughts. I am quite sure he is capable of making his own decisions."

If you speculate about his actions on a discussion board, people might think you want to discuss it. They might even comment as to what they think he might do and why they think he might do it. If you don't like that, you have several options.

1. Don't speculate in future.
2. Engage the discussion anyway.
3. Ignore the person who responded.
4. Filter the person who responded.
5. Snipe at the person who responded.

Congratulations on your choice.

It's my fault, every time I buy something the price drops.

"Gervaise not coming out to play today?"

Not sure why we'd expect him to. It's NCM results. They talked about Hav in general terms but didn't give any new drilling results or make any specific announcements about Hav. For GGP, it's pretty much the same as any other day, I think.

When it's time to tell us something about Scal, we'll hear from him, perhaps not until then.

Mkt Cap is £500 million. A one-off $339K (AUD) fee is hardly significant. Less than £200K.

Biggest issue with this is it would create a mess of the inheritance tax planning of some PIs on AIM.