Member Info for TigerByTheTail

"Corrective" RNS at 10.37 a.m. from Barrick. Barrick CEO Mark Bristow can't even give a simple interview to Bloomberg without putting his foot in it. All in all, it's pretty pathetic. It's as clear as day (to me, at least), that if Barrick want their offer to succeed it will have to be increased. I assume that it is only on that basis that the Acacia BOD granted them the PUSU extension; otherwise, what was the point?

"Statement re. Acacia Mining plc

Toronto, June 19, 2019 - Barrick Gold Corporation (NYSE: GOLD) (TSX: ABX) ("Barrick" or the "Company") today provides the following further update in relation to Acacia Mining plc ("Acacia").

Barrick notes the article by Bloomberg dated 18 June 2019 (the "Article") and confirms that it is proposing to engage intensively with Acacia's minority shareholders in coming weeks. As referred to in the Article, these discussions will be on the basis of the proposal set out in Barrick's announcement of 21 May (the "Proposal") and will provide an update on the situation in Tanzania and a review of Acacia's mine plans which together underpin Barrick's view that the Proposal represents fair value (as set out in full in Barrick's announcement of 18 June). However, nothing in the Article should be considered to be a no increase statement for the purposes of Rule 32.2 of the Code."

Hi Sumoskier!
How about:
1) First PGMs produced at Platcro PGMs (Eland) after plant has finished commissioning; or
2) Completion of Sable acquisition after Zambia completes their formalities, plus possible news of Star Zinc / other additional zinc ore offtake agreement.
Both of those announcements should be "imminent" (in the sense of the next few weeks, if not necessarily tomorrow).
There are also the big "not quite a surprise" announcements that could come at anytime. I.e.:
1) Announcement of copper / cobalt deal in Zambia;
2) Fine chrome process developments; and
3) Partnership with a major to manage all their waste materials.
I'd guess these three will all happen in the course of the next year, but when, I don't know...

If it comes to it. this RNS just adds to the evidence that Barrick have attempted to oppress (i.e. cheat) Acacia's minority shareholders.
I can't believe that a big corporation like Barrick would issue such an RNS. It's plain stupid, legally speaking.
It's only pretty naive to think that it will cause the minority shareholders to "crack" and agree to a lowball offer.

Barrick have just released an RNS attempting to talk down Acacia's share price.
It's beyond foolish - don't they have lawyers to advise them? Why didn't they just stay silent?

Final source for this article is Chinese regime mouthpiece the Global Times. It looks like the rare earth card may soon be played in the US-China trade war.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/china-roll-out-rare-earths-policies-us-trade-war-11633418

Surely a buy signal?
Barrick asked for an extension to the "Put Up or Shut Up" deadline. Acacia admit that a Barrick buy-out would be a desirable outcome, subject to the price being fair. Current indicative offer (about 170p equivalent) has clearly failed to win enough Acacia minority shareholder support. Thus, we are headed towards an increased Barrick offer, surely?

Palladium soaring at $1460, Rhodium very high at $3130, Platinum still lagging at @$800.
Today would be a good day to start the production of PGMs at Platcro / Eland!

www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-17/china-roll-out-new-rare-earth-policy
It looks like China is preparing to restrict the export of rare earths and permanent magnets as their next escalation in the trade war...

Confirmation that Derek Linfield, MKA Chairman, has more than doubled his shareholding here from 1.65% to 3.8%.
That's got to be a positive sign!

I think you've got to see the mass exercise of warrants from the IPO (including MKA's Chairman) as a show of confidence in the company's future.
TBH, I'm not expecting many of the new shares to be sold off. And, as the company is now holding roughly 7.7p in cash per share in issue, that will set a firm price floor.
Personally, now the warrants have either been exercised or have expired, I'm having trouble seeing why the share price isn't double. It's not like this isn't a very viable rare earth project in a stable jurisdiction with a major international conglomerate (Talaxis / Nobel) as a partner!

Barrick's indicative offer equivalent cash price now about 169p.
That said, I've got no real idea if Barrick will make a formal offer for Acacia before tomorrow's deadline, and, if so, at what price.
If pushed, I'd say that Barrick will NOT make a formal offer at the indicative price. This is: a) because it will almost certainly fail, so what's the point?; b) because it may activate a "pushmepullyou" clause, meaning Barrick themselves could be bought out on the cheap; and c) because it may worsen their already bad legal position, with regard to their putative oppression of the minority shareholders.
So, IMO, either Barrick's offer will come in at a higher price, or there will be no offer at all, and this dispute will progress to international arbitration. I'm not against arbitration, as I believe it will eventually lead to a higher value for Acacia's shares. But then, I don't need the money I have invested here in the near future, and not everybody may be in that position.
Anyway, having written all that, now watch me be wrong!

Here is an excellent article on the current impasse:
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/metals/061419-barricks-offer-for-acacia-in-a-three-way-scenario-analysts
Note the section about a law suit founded on oppression of Acacia's minority shareholders. Obviously, this was fed to the journalist by one of the sources in the article, and it's a public warning to Barrick about their so far disgraceful conduct.
I've got no idea what the next week will bring. I know what should happen, which is an offer at Barrick's own book price - it's the best outcome for everybody. But Mark Bristow seems to be floundering very badly in his new role, and anything could happen.

All it takes now is the recovery of one decent sized canary yellow gemstone from the bulk sampling of the kimberlite blow and this share will fly...

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-acacia-mining-barrick-gold-odey/acacia-investor-odey-against-any-best-and-final-offer-from-barrick-idUKKCN1TE2PE

Palladium and rhodium prices soaring. Overall basket price for PGMs should be strong.
Platinum - $813
Palladium - $1,433
Rhodium - $3,250
I'm finding it hard to find chrome concentrate pricing, but according to Metal Bulletin it is currently trading at a lowish $150 per tonne CIF China.

Two mildly interesting take-outs from the RNS with the results from the AGM:
1. Director's remuneration only received 66% support with 33% against. Is that Barrick voting half their shares one way, and half the other, as a warning to the directors?
2. One of Barrick's appointees to the board only got 80% approval, and 20% against. Given that Barrick will of course have voted for their own person, that reads to me as a warning from the minority shareholders to Barrick that they aren't to be pushed over.
Still, the share price hasn't flinched, so I don't think this matters very much.

Hi Rosewall!
I'm thinking that Kabwe (including some pre-processing work on concentrating the tailings) will legally be one business, and Sable will be another. That makes sense to me.
Introducing extra "outside" zinc ore would lengthen Sable's working lifespan, and as a consequence extend the number of years the BMR royalty was spread across - i.e. the same total amount of money would be due to BMR (metal prices being assumed to be stable) but over a longer span of years. I don't think we're talking about doubling the number of years though, more like increasing them from around 10 to around 12.
Also, in this conversation we should all remember that, according to the announced target output of Sable, about 50% of the revenue will come from vanadium, about 33% will come from zinc, and about 17% from lead (the precise ratio varies with metal prices). So adding in zinc (only) ore from Star Zinc (or other suppliers) won't make a huge difference to the total revenues from Sable. It may be worthwhile doing, it may improve efficiencies, but I don't think it is a big deal for Jubilee.
(It is, however, a big deal for GLR, which is why it is being talked up here. But that's a different matter.)

Lee Morris!
I'm not a Vast shareholder any longer, so no I won't be turning up to the next GM needed to approve the next share issue here. As I've written previously, I sold out of Vast at 0.18, put the money in Bacanora at 13p, sold at around 27p, and so I've made up almost all of my losses here.
I hope I'm wrong for the sake of all genuine shareholders, but I regard Vast as pretty much a lost cause.
You really need to reflect on your own actions here, which (IMO) have been disgraceful. Even possibly illegal if you are UK resident - in "marketing" the direct investment into (the absolutely worthless) Blueberry Project the way you did on this board, you would have a lot to explain to the FCA.

Here's an article from Forbes. Background info only, it doesn't mention Mkango directly.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timtreadgold/2019/06/12/china-risks-damaging-its-rare-earth-industry-if-it-puts-an-embargo-on-exports-to-the-u-s/#25692e175611
I'd expect the trade war rhetoric to hot up next week in the run up to the G20 meeting on June 20th. After that, who knows? But, personally, I don't think peace is going to break out soon; IMO this has the feel of a conflict that could last decades.

Hi Minor Miner!
No offence, but "we" don't all know that, if "we" includes me.
Given GLR's obvious need to raise cash plus the need for a licence plus the lack of any kind of a mine plan, I can't see Star Zinc producing this year. Maybe in 2020.
And no, Jubilee don't "need" the Star Zinc ore. I'm sure the company will be happy to process it for the right price, as extra ore will extend the refinery's life and may indeed improve efficiencies. But "need" is the wrong word entirely.
I'm not saying an investment in GLR is a dead cert money-loser. It could all work out. But it is highly speculative. And since Jubilee is already profitable and has pretty incredible prospects, I'll keep my money here.