Member Info for TakingMyTime

"why is it not helping this morning?"
Four kinds of people will read the IC mention.
1. The people who haven't read it yet but will later. No impact yet.
2. The people who read it and aren't interested. No impact.
3. The people who read it and decide, "I'm going to look into that company." They will do so today, over the weekend, next week. No impact yet, no one would have had time to do proper research.
4. The people who read it and decide, "I'll buy," without any research at all. Those same people will sell next week when Motley Fool or someone else says GGP is overpriced. They don't know what they are doing, they buy and sell on a whim or a whinge. But they are the only ones that could have moved the share this soon as a result of the IC.

As with most good things, give it a little time.

That's cool, spoon_key, thanks. I don't want a fight, either, nor do I want you to be banned.

@napth
"The simple answer is no. There is no legal obligation to advertise jobs internally or externally."

Exactly. If not advertised internally you run serious risk of a discrimination tribunal from a disgruntled employee who wanted the job. But it's not legally required. The result, effectively, is that HR always says to advertise internally.

Many jobs are never advertised externally. Companies promote from within without ever advertising externally, happens all the time.

Chances are NCM already posted it internally.

Not blocking you, never said I would. Quite happy to read your comments on IAG shares. Don't even mind your political views that much, but you go out of your way to start fights.

LOL, me too.

"Can't Argue with Alexa"
Then go buy Amazon.

@curdas9, nice posts.

The problem with this board is a couple trolls are constantly deramping and instead of filtering and ignoring them, a few regulars constantly back and forth with them. The result is that the trolls keep posting and posting. Most people here are not negative about this company, most have invested here and believe it is a good long term, or maybe even medium term, investment. But the board is a mess, primarily because of one person who isn't invested.

@spudderman, LOL.

@stuart
Those options haven't hit the market. They've hit sticky hands, I suspect. They are eligible for trading now but that doesn't mean the owners are trading them. I wouldn't be if I were in their position.

@Paddy "that implies (to me at least) that it hasn't been designed yet."

And to me. The fact that they are moving on this hire now suggests to me the decline is starting in the fourth quarter, not the third. It also suggests it is starting this year, but maybe not until quite late in the year.

Great find, schlemiel.

"Why not appoint a Newcrest employee(s) to perform this most routine of tasks, a task Newcrest have no doubt performed many times before?"
It's a fixed term position. They aren't looking for a permanent employee here, but for someone who will come in, do the job, make a lot of money, and move on.

Perhaps their in-house people are busy at Red Chris. Perhaps this is a role they always contract out or use fixed term people for. I don't think I'd read anything into that.

As to going public rather than using an agency, why be secretive? They've been very public that they wanted to do this. There's no secret of the fact that they intend to mine. NCM shares are up again today. Why not be public about it? The people who do this work will have been paying attention to Hav, and they'll have been watching for this kind of notice from NCM. The CVs will be rolling in.

@Minx, if you just want someone to tell you what to do, I recommend selling your house, wife, and kids, and putting it all into GGP.

If you want to truly understand the company, I suggest going to ggphelp.co.uk, read the FAQ, watch all the videos, then go to greatlandgold.com and check out the financials.

@RA, are you my son? I agreed so much with your last comment that it sounded like things I'd taught him.

No, you aren't. He doesn't agree with me as much as you do, LOL.

I guess I'll just close by saying that I also don't think NCM really wants to buy out GGP. They might want to buy GGP's share of Hav, but not even sure it's that important to them to do that.

If NCM buys out GGP, it would most likely be as a "white knight" if someone else (Rio?) tries to horn in on the situation by trying to buy GGP. If that happened, I think NCM would step up. And I think they are in a better position, because of Telfer, to win that bidding war.

@RA, well, maybe only 8 of the planets lining up (is Pluto still a planet? I can never keep up).

I agree that the "risk" of an early buyout is better described as a potential missed opportunity, though in the final analysis that and a "risk" can both be things that limit upside. But it certainly isn't a downside risk.

I don't agree with your view that NCM wouldn't buy out GGP entirely, though. I'm not saying they will but there's no real reason to assume they wouldn't, either.

We've just seen that it was worth it for GGP to acquire Rudall. And Rio was trying to get in there as well. That's a major trying to grab these unproven tenements. Why wouldn't NCM be glad to acquire unproven tenements? Obviously, there's some risk in doing so, but let's put that risk in perspective.

Suppose that by the end of the year we know enough to guess that GGP's share of Hav is worth 25p, and both GGP and NCM agree. So SB goes to GH and says, "Ok, but how would you feel about a buyout?" GH says, "Scal might be worth a lot. Rudall, too." SB says, "Ok, add another 10p." Now, we've got a 35p offer on the table. We're being paid 10p for Scal when, for all we know, it's not even economical to mine. Should GH take it? A 10p premium for shareholders for Scal/Rudall/everything else? A year ago, if offered 10p for everything, most shareholders would have said, "Yes!"

That 10p premium is about £400 million for NCM. Real money, sure. But it's really just a premium on Hav, with everything else tossed in. NCM market cap is around £18 billion.

@gandhi "TMT. What if NCM is bought out on the cheap"
This is not a risk I consider likely enough to factor into my thinking, but be my guest, LOL.

I think we should be clear that this is not a religion.

The case for GGP does not rest on faith, it rests on a solid analysis of risks and upside, with reasonable assessments of the likelihood and impact of each. If you can't assess the risks and evaluate them, you shouldn't be invested.

Huge resistance at $1800, I think. This could happen quickly, sure. But it might also take a long, long time.

Inevitable, eventually, I think. Too much helicopter money for it to be prevented.

@Rational
My view is that most of hydro's stated risks are short term "the market might go down for a while" risks, but not risks that affect the ultimate value of the assets and thus the long-term likely value of the shares. For instance, if Beetham sells a bunch of shares, it might tank the price temporarily, but if Hav is sold for 25p a share and we're getting a 20p / share dividend, it won't have mattered if Beetham sold. (That's just illustrative, no predictions as to what actually will happen.)

I only see two real risks here:

1. Future drilling results show Hav is not as good as we all think. In my view, the likelihood of that is getting slimmer and slimmer every six weeks.
2. No other GGP assets pan out as economical to mine. In my view, it is impossible to quantify the likelihood of that.

If both of those risks materialise, this share might really only be worth 10p or something.

There's another risk which IMO is significant enough that I've hedged against it. That is a risk that GGP is bought out too soon and significant assets are lost. It's possible GGP has assets worth £1 / share, maybe even more. But if NCM came in and offered a quarter of that, it might be hard for GH to say no. Maybe he would and it would go to 33p. I suspect a hostile attempt at 40-50p would succeed, maybe even quite a bit lower. If that happened, we might have made out like bandits, the assets might only be worth 20p or something -- but we also might have lost a truly spectacular upside. So there's a risk, in an early takeover, that we don't get to fully benefit from what GGP owns.

I don't really see NCM standing on the sidelines if someone else tries to buy GGP -- they need Hav, and if GGP's share is going to be sold, they'll want it. If there is gold at Scal, even if there's the possibility of a lot of gold there, they want it going through Telfer, and not in Rio's hands.

And, if it's an early agreed buyout, it will be NCM, of that I'm almost certain.

The same applies to the sale of Hav rather than the entire company -- it could be sold too soon, with NCM the beneficiaries.

So, I've hedged the risk somewhat on this by also buying NCM shares. If Hav, or GGP, is bought before we know full value, I expect the buyer (and beneficiary) to be NCM. If that happens, I expect to do well out of it.

It's been asked why NCM would pay such a premium. I didn't say they would, though if a bidding war began, who knows? But I can tell you why they might.

1. Hostile takeovers are messy, and can interfere with future JVs with other juniors. They also risk "white knight" interventions by other majors. They won't want that kind of situation with Hav. So they will much prefer an agreed takeover to a hostile takeover, and be willing to pay a premium to get agreement from GGP BOD.
2. If the goal is an agreed takeover, then you have to deal, not with the current SP, but with what the GGP BOD believe is the value of the company / assets. GGP has access to all the results that NCM has. I don't think the current SP is even in the frame of what Hav is likely worth, and I suspect both NCM and GGP know that.
3. If the goal is an agreed takeover, the price has to reflect the value of the other assets.

What's the value of the other assets? No one knows. There's a downside value (0p / share) and an upside value, that might be quite large.

Should NCM be willing to take a risk on that asset? If they want to buy GGP, they should. Is it bad value for their shareholders? Depends on how much risk they take.

Being also a shareholder in NCM, GGP's assets look appealing to me. I would have no objection to acquiring them for 30-40p. If it doesn't pan out, the loss isn't all that significant for NCM. If it does, the upside is pretty significant.

Should they go as high as £1? Maybe, depends on what they know (and we don't) about Hav.

I don't even know if they want to acquire GGP. But if they do, there is lots of reason for paying a significant premium.

Didn't answer my own question. If GH recommended the deal, I'd take it. If he really thinks 25p is a good deal for shareholders, he knows more than me, and I'd accept it.

If he rejected the offer, it would take at least £1 / share to convince me to ignore his recommendation. Depends on what the drilling results are between now and then, though, if we really do hit another Havieron with Scallywag then £1 / share probably isn't enough.