Member Info for technician

Beardozer no specific reason why not, it's just not what I was suggesting.

In my personal opinion I think we're more likley to have an investment into the mine rather than an offer to buy us out.

That should have read Simandou is so expensive becasue of the colossal infrastructure costs, not Rio!!

Starbright I wasn't suggesting we were about to get offered $2.4 billion. Royston asked if Simandou being developed was a positive or negative for us.

In my opinion it's overall a positive indicator as we can see that at least one company (in this case Rio) consider it worthwhile to spend $6.2billion (in addition to what they have already spent) on the mine in order to obtain their 27 Mtpa output. It is Rio that stated their share of the iron ore would be 27 Mtpa.

As I understand it Rio is so expensive because of teh colossal infrastructure costs. Mainly a railway track of 600 + km over hilly terrain.

If Rio are prepared to pay a total of over $6.9billion for 27 Mtpa then it would be nice to think that Zanaga at 30Mtpa should have a similar value. Taking out our $4.5billion development costs (for 30Mtpa) would still leave $2.4billion to share amongst the current shareholders.

The positive we can take from the news Simandou is going into production is the fact that Rio will have spent in excess of $6.9 billion for their share (27 mtpa) of the Simaondou project in order to get it up and running.

This is based on the fact Rio have previously handed over $700million to the Guinean government for their rights to the mine and have now told their shareholders they will be investing another $6.2billion as their share of the development costs. This doesn't include any money they had already spent on studies etc at the mine site which I have read were anything between $1.35 and $3billion.

I bought these at £3.75 after the first SFO announcement. Held up to £6 plus and still held all the way down to £0.75 where I bailed. More by luck than judgement as I didn;t expect this.

I just can't see what the shorters have to gain by shorting from such a low price unless they already know something that we don't.

Let's be honest, I'm pretty sure there's no one short on here.

There might be people trying to trade in and out of the share to lower their buy in price but most (myself included) are long term holders.

I have no intention of selling but it doesn't stop me being somewhat irritated to see the share price decimated from 18 pence to 4 pence in the space of a couple of months.

Anyway at least we've had a good day today. It would only take another 15 days of 16% rises to get the share price to 46 pence.

Veteran I get where you're coming from regarding Trahar and Elphick but the sad fact of the matter is that we don't have the money to pay anyone else so we are probably stuck with them.

I think we are dependent on someone coming along and offering them a deal as I don't get the feeling there is a lot of activity from them promoting or marketing the mine.

Thanks Extrader for continuing with the level headed research posts.

I must admit I'm finding it hard not to join in with the doom and gloom being understandably expressed here due to our collapsed share price and dilution for what seems to be peanuts. I can only think it's Shard dumping the shares, but why the BOD agreed to this fund raise I do not know.

The longer this goes on the more I'm inclined to agree with your suggestion Driving that this Shard placing is just the only way they could get their mates in to the share without spiking the share price.

However I can't see Glen being a part of that so why did they allow the placing (which will dilute their holding) for the sake of a few quid (in Glencore terms)? If they really thought this was going to be bought out wouldn't they just have extended their loan facility?

NewKOTB - I don't think that will make any difference to us really. I'd be alarmed if Glencore suddenly started selling shares on the open market but I don't expect that will be the case.

Eddsy - no disrespect (I'm invested here too) but I'm not sure we have any conclusive proof anything is going on yet and certainly the market remains to be convinced.

I hope all the talk comes to something but I won't be holding my breath over the weekend.

I see where you're coming from Jiving and certainly a valid point.

I just can't see DSN allowing £2billion (or whatever figure you care to give as current value) in cash to be handed over to the shareholders of a mine in "his country" without some serious incentive going his way as well.

Wow. That is some shareholding and a very nice average.

Makes my stake look somewhat sorry for itself. Total holding about 216000 with an average about where we are now.

He certainly was a "special one".

Love to hear from him again about where it all went wrong (for him).

There was a chartist on this thread a little while back who seemed pretty convinced he knew what he was doing. Went by the name of PRO_TRADER

I've previously tried to research Oasis crescent's investments but I can only seem to find their bigger investments listed, of which Zioc isn't one.

I get the valuation of the mine, I just don't see cash changing hands for our shares. But yes I do agree valuation wise. I can't see why anyone should sell this 12 years down the line for any less than the IPO valuation.

I'm inclined to agree with that opinion ET.

Much more likely an investor will take a stake in Zioc on the understanding they will fund either all or a percentage of the development costs.

Whether that's development costs for small scale, stage 1 or the whole lot remains to be seen.

I appreciate your boundless enthusiasm MM and certainly some of your posts are relevant and newsworthy although I do think some of your joining of dots is way OTT. Never the less thank you for the time you must spend researching.

Sustain can you post a link to the article please

Just out of interest, how long have you all been invested in ZIOC?

I've been here about 6 years now.

Anyone been here since IPO?