Member Info for theiceberg

The advantage of L2...you could see the AT s taking down the price and very very little AT buying...market makers not wanting to be exposed before Christmas so down it goes...The reverse is true as well and the SP has looked strong again in the last half hr, with lots of AT s taking it back up. Probably back to 35-36 again shortly, but we've got no sight of when the AT trades will push it about.

Jerry I don't know why you even pretend to be invested, if you openly have doubts that solg can even fill the forms in for a mining license.

Jerry it's a completely different set of documents. Impossible to compare.
The solg documents are already being prepared the main one being the EIA. So yes solg can do the documents and yes hey will get outside contractors in for things like environmental baselining....they have to and I doubt even newcrest have an ecuadorian, ecosystem expert on their payroll.
Literally hundreds of companies get licenses every year, inc much smaller aim companies, it's not just newcrest capable of producing them.

No change at all with the agm, we have a buyer we have a seller, we have the sp in the 35-37p range.

Cool, David is nice if a little wet more of a solid guy, but I have called for his resignation from his CEO role, which I don't think he's suited for. He seems to spend all his time in Italy taking a full wage whilst being semi retired.

Rcl they can issue shares though to say Franco (10%) but they also need to offer the same terms to existing share holders and allow newcrest and BHP to maintain their 13%.
The problem is those terms might inc not selling the shares for 12 months and or any other amount of rules.

Lafitte, I am aware of Anglo pacific. I spoke with David archer just after he became senior independent director.
I know there was a lot of rebuilding of the directors as there was pretty much no corporate governance.
Did a majority of the share votes want him to go ? Or a minority? Did he resign because he was going to lose or did the board get rid of him.
From memory I thought the majority of share holders wanted him gone? But I was only 38 or so at the time and it was many years ago.

I need to get some wrapping done of my wife will kill me.....I am happy to see examples, evidence of a minority of shareholders sacking a CEO who won the majority of voters.

Red, because you count Nick's votes ffs, you can't exclude them!!! Would you exclude Elons votes are Zuckerbergs of course not, it's how the world works.

Show me then addict!
I am open to evidence but I've seen nothing, so far.!
I have given various examples to back up my points
If we take the directors nick, jason, brian , robert, probably liam would see help frozen over before sacking nick, let alone the others.

Red, there is zero evidence that any directors want to get rid of him, let alone 6 or 7!

Addict, no you didn't, you mentioned Gavin Patterson at BT, who was fired because of fines and scandals...was he fired because a minority of shareholders wAnted to get rid of him, after a majority of shareholders voted for him? Was he ever voted in by share holders of just appointed...

Red thanks for the link but it 100% supports my view...you don't discount the votes that the CEO owns and the board takes the ceo s ownership into account and you need a majority of shareholders to get rid of the ceo..
A majority didnt, therefore there is nothing they can do.
It's not just you red, but I've asked another of times where there is evidence that a minority of shareholders have forced out a CEO like this? It doesn't happen imo.
Unless Nick wAnts to leave, he's got the job for now and will likely cement that position, he might even try to put a wedge between newcrest and BHP by offering them something, mAybe with a threat of issuing shares to the Chinese, franco, barrick etc.

Thankfully ohwhat your opinion doesn't matter, replace it with Mark zuckerberg, or anyone of hundreds of companies...The ceos share holding is counted in any votes otherwise hundreds of ceos would be out tomorrow.
It's the principle and the law.

Of course you count Nick and certainly dgr etc. Legislative no choice but to count them.

It's like elon musk who owns 20% of tesla has no say in him being ceo. In the real world it doesn't happen.
Also if a shareholder who owns 12-13% of the company could team up with another such shareholder to put the CEO and control the bod. Then almost every losing hostile takeover in the world would be successful even those that didn't actually get a majority vote..
There are 100 companies in similar situation to tesla where the founder could\would be turfed out on a whim of this was the case.

Yes but a majority of shareholders have not lost faith in him.!!!!
And you've ignored my point. Some major shareholders want him to stay and some dont...they won't and have a legal responsibility not to, kickout a CEO of new just been voted in a majority of share holders.
Please give me an example where a minority of shareholders have ever forced out a CEO voted in by a majority of shareholders within a few weeks.
What makes CGP more of a majority holder than dgr?

Red it is the role of ied s to talk to shareholders, it is not their job to replace the CEO of a minority of shareholders disagree with his strategy. If the CEO has a strategy which is both legal and intended to give maximum return to shareholders then their legal responsibility is to support him. If a majority of major shareholders don't support him then fine..
You could equally say that the major shareholders such as dgr and ten star want him to stay...
Well done for you courage to say when you think he will go, but it doesnt make sense and I can't find any similar situations.

I would genuinely recommend if you think you will make money elsewhere then sell. If you don’t like the situation then sell. I hope folks make money.

Idea number 3

If cascabel is worth 1bn and we would be happy with that as it’s a fair value. Why don’t we bid 150m for CGPs share of 15%?
If it’s good idea and fair value surely they would take it. I mean we would right?

I've got another idea and it's a real good one..
Nick should call an egm and lose, then he will probably have 35% of the vote so whoever is the new CEO won't have the ability to run the company.

Remember you can't run a company if major shareholders are against you such as dgr tenstar and mathers. Also they couldn't pass any special resolutions so the new CEO would be a lame duck...
It would be perfect for nick.