Member Info for TakingMyTime

Sorry mate but you engaged in personal abuse and damaged your credibility. You have a point that BP doesn't move completely in parallel with oil prices but you overstated it, because price of oil obviously is a big driver in BP's profitability, therefore a driver of dividends and of share price.

You may think there's no future in oil but it isn't stupid to think that it is an important asset that someone could still want to invest in. It's not going away for a long time. Some of us would like to invest in that because we think there's still a future in it. It doesn't mean we're stupid, it means we aren't persuaded yet that the alternatives are going to be sufficiently economical and environmentally sound to actually replace oil.

If you want BP to not be that company, good for you. Looks like Looney agrees with you. We'll find out down the road whether his plan is really going to pay off or not. Meanwhile, you'd do well to spare this board the childish abuse of those who disagree with you.

I got that chopper, assumed nothing different. And obviously it's better to top up at a lower price than a higher one. Just if I had money to put on something that was going to be a full bagger I'd want to get the money on it before the price went up, since we've seen sudden increases happen on this share. Rather that than miss the opportunity trying to squeeze an extra 0.5p out of it.

But looks like you've had that chance, so well done you, your patience for the lower price looks to have paid off! Good luck!

@Teddy "News is not news until it happens."
Mate, you're obviously pretty bright but you aren't getting this one at all.

Stock markets do not only react to news. They react to rumours, to guesses, to lots of things. YOU do the same. You've made a guess as to what's going to happen with IAG, one with which I agree, and bought shares accordingly. You've bought on an intelligent guess, but not on news. There's no hard news (yet) that tells us IAG is going to make money and be a valuable share to hold. We're making a guess based on facts and sound reasoning but not on news.

That's also where the expression "buy the rumour, sell the news" comes in. The markets often "buy the rumour." If people wait until the news comes in, they won't get in at a good price, so they buy on rumours. Those buys on rumours drive the SP up. Maybe it will go up further when the news comes in, or maybe it won't, it depends on how many people bought on the rumour and whether the news is really better or worse than the rumour.

It's that effect of driving the price up that the market talks of as things being "priced in", or partly priced in. It's people buying the rumour. If the news doesn't come, or isn't as good as expected, the price drops. Why? Because the news was partly "priced in" and then it didn't come true.

Saying something is "priced-in" doesn't mean news doesn't matter. It means that many market participants have guessed/anticipated the news and so it has already affected the price. In one respect, it makes the news even more important.

That's the whole point is to have a place to refer people who come here asking questions but don't have a clue, so the whole board isn't taken up with that kind of stuff.

@Spy
Yeah, I saw what you posted. That's why I called it a "whatever it is," LOL. Had some fun with that over the weekend, too, if you recall. I'm sure if it is important it will all become very clear to all of us eventually, right?

Since I think most people here are buy and hold anyway this is all sound and fury signifying nothing.

A few suggestions for FAQ:
1. What is Haverion?
2. What is Scallywag?
3. Where is Black Hills?
4. What happened with the Newmont agreeement?
5. Does Greatland have enough cash?
6. Why isn't there any drilling at Scallywag right now, if everyone thinks it might be great?
7. Why do people talk about the Martu people?
8. Will Newcrest Mining buy Greatland Gold out of their share of the Haverion project?
9. Will Greatland Gold ever do any mining or will they always be strictly an exploration company?
10. Why do people talk about "jurisdiction"?
11. What is a "farm in" agreement?
12. What is "Telfer" and why is it relevant to GGP?
13. What is "toll processing"?
14. What is the real number of shares outstanding?
15. What happens with warrants and options if someone decides to make an offer to buy GGP?
16. Who do private investors think might want to buy out GGP?

That should work for starters. :) If you write all of those you'll be at this for weeks. Maybe if people around here think any of those questions / answers would be useful to new investors, they could volunteer to write the answers here and spare you from ALL the work.

Made for a lot of entertainment over the weekend. Too bad not everyone took it in fun but whatever, life's too short not to blow off some steam over the weekend. My favourite was the reverse takeover, and someone responding it would take a lot of time. Yeah, like centuries, LOL.

Would be incredible and phenomenal if they find high mineralisation 800m further out. Hope Spy's whatever it is turns out as good.

Still waiting for GH's news, of course, which will undoubtedly be the real highlight of the week if it comes this week.

If you think it's going to 27, why do you care about topping up at 11.9 instead of 12.5, or whatever? What if it doesn't drop and you never get that opportunity? You'd risk throwing away 15p / share in pursuit of 0.5p? I don't get that.

I recommend ignoring this guy and reporting his posts if you think they are abusive. He's adding nothing right now to the question of whether BP is a good investment.

"It’s clearly Paddy"
GGP is finally hiring Paddy?

(For those with no sense of humour, please disregard the above, thanks)

There are many factors besides POG.

For instance, the market has been growing more and more aware that Telfer is a declining asset.

Maybe NCM is priced just fine now but was overpriced a year ago. Maybe, like GGP, NCM is underpriced simply because the market doesn't get it.

I don't see any evidence of poor management.

I do think at current SP NCM might be vulnerable to a takeover. There's some big players with a lot of resources. As a shareholder of NCM, that would be pretty cool. As a shareholder of GGP, I hope not yet, I like the NCM/GGP partnership.

Yeah, I'm sure it would put some people off.

I think we discussed this a few weeks back, though we didn't have a price on the tests back then. At the time I said that it might well put me off for a weekend break, but not for a week's holiday. I think the same probably goes for a family of five -- yeah, it's a lot of money, but compared to the cost of taking a family of five to the US for a week (airfare, food, hotel, ground transport, Disneyworld or whatever it is you do while there, etc, etc), it's not really that much.

And not likely to impact business travel at all.

But definitely could make people think twice about a weekend break or something. Mostly, that's not trans-Atlantic flights, though. Most people crossing the pond do so for business or for breaks of at least a week, and I don't see this being a significant deterrent to those.

@Newbie "Only a select few would be willing to pay"
Thanks for the compliment, but I don't think I'm quite that "select".

That's nothing to add to the cost of a week's holiday. Pay that or no holiday? I'll take the holiday, thanks.

And then what if you're positive, you ask? Good news, you caught it early, hopefully before you end up passing it on, and you can be sure you get any treatment going that is needed without waiting to find out if you've got it.

"True, but you go into a hostile takeover with every intention of winning. "
Of course. But a poison provision like that prevents any sort of gradual accumulation. It gives a compelling reason for shareholders to tell the buyer, "No thanks."

If such a provision existed, the absolute floor that NCM would have to pay would be double the current market cap. Who would accept less than 25p, if by saying "no" you would be getting a 20p special dividend from the poison provision? If I knew GGP was getting a $1Bn payout from NCM within a month, and GH was telling me, "No, their offer isn't good enough," would I say "yes"? Not much chance of that.

These kinds of provisions don't technically "prevent" a hostile bid, that is almost impossible. But effectively they can make it so painful / expensive that the takeover isn't worth it.

Again, I have no clue if such a provision exists, or how enforceable it is in Oz law.

@WF "Wow, and the lawyers make a pie of cash when trying to enforce it."
Probably. It doesn't matter. The counterparty doesn't want to get dragged into that kind of legal fight, so it is sufficient deterrent to prevent the hostile takeover.

I think it's more common in cases where the primary asset is intellectual property or an invention.

@Dodge "hostile takeover of NCM ; )"
I did get in early on NCM, but I want to top up my holdings before all you guys pile in and drive the price up. Can you leave it for a while, please?

@WF "How TMT, How?

A clause preventing a hostile takeover attempt? In a commercial contract?"

"Section 43
The Farmee shall not acquire more than 120,000,000 shares of the Farmor during the Term except by mutual written agreement.
In the event of any breach of the obligation in this Section 43, the Farmee shall pay to the Farmor a penalty to the sum of $1,000,000,000 (One Billion Dollars). Such penalty shall be paid within 30 days of the breach."

If you buy more than 3% you are in breach. It is easily enforced because 3% is notifiable, and the size of the penalty is sufficient deterrent.

Admittedly, I don't know enough about Aussie law to know whether there would be enforceability issues in that jurisdiction, nor what the legal language might look like. Nor do I know whether GGP would request such a clause or NCM would agree to it. But I would be very surprised if it were impossible. I've seen similar clauses (in a non-mining context, and not an Aussie or UK jurisdiction) more than once.

I posted a lot of nonsense on here last night in fun, but this one wasn't "more nonsense."

"Commercial contracts just don't normally have such clauses, and why would either party even wish to have such a clause in any agreement anyway?"

There could potentially be a clause preventing a hostile takeover attempt.

It would be both counter-productive and unenforceable to have a contract preventing an agreed buyout.

"Personally, I don't know anything about 1200m oz. Has anyone bothered to work out how much that actually is."
Well, if you are going to be conservative about the amount of gold, we should also use a conservative price, let's go with $2500 / oz. Conservatively assume the Cu takes AISC to 0. That puts us right at $3 trillion, which even if we steal NCM's share will not cover the US deficit this year.

Jerry, per year?