Member Info for Wildcamper

Is it coincidence that the anniversary of that last restructuring is imminent?

I think we all know that it's no coincidence. This has been a long time in the planning methinks.

The last time shareholders were asked to vote on a rule 9 takeover waiver was 12 months ago, when CIG stumped up another $30m. This increased their shareholding to about 40% and required a waiver as it took them over 30% holding. I'm quoting from the extant RBS as I'm not sufficiently au faix with the details of these rules to know what I'm talking about!

These were the undertakings to which CIG committed at the time -

"The terms of the CIG Subscription Agreement include:

· An undertaking by CIG that it will not (save in limited circumstances) dispose of the CIG First Tranche Shares for a period of 12 months from the date of their admission to trading on AIM or the CIG Second Tranche Shares for 12 months from the date of Admission; and

· The grant to CIG of a pre-emption right in relation to further equity issued by the Company while it holds 20 per cent. or more of the Ordinary Shares.

As noted in the Company's 7 February 2023 announcement, CIG is party to a relationship agreement with the Company and the Company's nominated adviser, Strand Hanson Limited, which imposes certain obligations on CIG in its position as a substantial shareholder (as defined under the AIM Rules) in the Company to ensure that the Company will at all times be capable of carrying on its business independently of CIG and the members of its group. The relationship agreement remains in force for so long as CIG's holding remains at 10 per cent. or above of the Company's issued share capital. Under the terms of the CIG Subscription Agreement, CIG has also agreed not to make an offer for the Company without the recommendation of the Board, for so long as its holding is at 15 per cent. or more of the Company's issued share capital, subject to limited exceptions.

CIG intends to finance the CIG Subscription through internal cash resources.

Rule 9 Panel Waiver

The Company requires a waiver granted by the Takeover Panel, pursuant to Rule 9 of the Takeover Code. The Company will also require Independent Shareholder approval to permit the issue of the CIG Second Tranche Shares, which would, if such new Ordinary Shares were issued, result in an increase in CIG's shareholdings to more than 30 per cent. and trigger a mandatory offer to Shareholders under Rule 9. Full details of the Rule 9 Panel Waiver are set out in Part 5 of this document.

Setting up Nioko to take the shares from CIG presumably means they have not broken their commitment not to sell or dispose of within 12 months?

Furthermore, am I reading this incorrectly when it states that CIG undertakes not to make an offer for the company whilst it owns >15% of the share capital WITHOUT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD?

This is as clear as mud! Where is the direction from the Board that an investor is entitled to expect in such circumstances?

Haven't had time to read this yet in detail, something for the weekend.

Money is gone, can't do anything about that, but still perversely interested in seeing how this pans out

Clearly the Mali junta and their BRICS friends are serious about replacement of the $ as the global reserve currency, whilst imposing some financial sanctions of their own in the meantime to boost their coffers.

The writing has been on the wall and mooted by some on this board no doubt, but I for one was certainly a bit naive in thinking that it would be a slower process, within the parameters of existing agreements and that HUM had this under control.

A very expensive lesson for an inexperienced private investor. I knew there were risks, but not on this level.

Is this the same Punter?

You now believe what the BOD is telling everyone!?

Confirmation, if any were needed, that BOD doesn't give two hoots about the interests of PIs

This is no way to attract foreign investment!

Dreadful presentation, as many have already said.

Why no mention of Dugbe, hedging contract status or ongoing relationships with Corica?

I'm convinced there's something more going on behind the scenes, politically. As is said, this is about Africans wanting to keep control of Africa's assets.

Nigel, it seems to me that this all really started going tits up when the relationship with Corica went sour. Why that happened, why it couldn't be quickly resolved and whether Corica are now on better terms with HUM, well I'm not sure we would ever know the truth behind what went/goes on there.

This whole charade seems to me about the Africans wanting to keep Africa's assets for itself. Not unreasonable, but if a real pattern emerges behind the failure/takeover of mines there, people will stop investing entirely. Just my opinion.

This may be helpful for some in understanding the dilution -

1 July 2024 RNS - Nioko received 334,665,274 shares, all those owned by it's holding company CIG SA.

At that time the issued capital was 810,280,000, giving them a 41.3% holding

Debt to equity conversion proposed, according to recent RNS gives them a further 863,079,491 shares ($30m @ c.77£/$ @ 2.6777p/share), bringing their total holding to 1.2bn.

Total issued capital will then be 1.7bn giving them nearly 72% ownership, with a bit lost in the final roundings.

I suspect GI, it will be full of excuses about past unforeseen and unavoidable "operational challenges" together with a few promises about how close they are to commercial production at Kour. Oh yes, with a big thank you to the company's backers for their continued support in looking after the interests of all stakeholders.

Please excuse my cynicism, born out of many years supporting the board and believing what we've been told by DB, only to get well and truly shafted.

I wish you guys well if you're sticking with it, my concerns would be Yan AISC and how much they're having to throw at that to get to the good veins.

Also, now that Geoffrey Eyre has been appointed to the board, I would hope that he'll be featuring in the presentation. I'll be watching with interest from the sidelines but am very, very unlikely to buy back in

Thanks for the explanation BT

... Coris buying up big tranches of shares at 2.1p as loyal shareholders run for the hills in the absence of any guaranteed offer, rather than wait and have to buy more at the offer price of 2.66?

These buys, which I think are ongoing, with the debt to equity swap giving them 71.8%, would surely give them >75% in no time?

Even if Kour is at commercial production, you have to ask what is the AISC, not just for Kour but also Yan. Their forays underground have so far proceed very expensive and I can't see that improving in the near future as they rely more on UR than the pit for an income stream

..... got shafted

After putting my faith and trust in the board of directors for many years, I now don't trusta word they say.

How many times did we hear Betts saying that he was working "in the best interests of all stakeholders"?

Absolute bullocks. He and the board are, and have, only ever been interested in looking after themselves.

If they're recommending no course of action, I would guarantee that it's because it's what is best for THEM.

Those big buys are almost certainly Nioko. With the debt to equity swap they'll be well over the 75% needed to run the show on their own.

After holding since the very early days I'm completely out at a big loss.

How did such a good asset get trashed to this point?

What's also galling is that all the good work done by the company in the local communities seems to count for nothing. Unless that's maybe why Nioko are at least giving the shareholders a chance to get something out of it.

Looks like somebody has bought about 6m shares over the last week. Punter .... ? 😆

Depending on the circumstances of the death of this poor individual, presumably that means another halt in production while internal/external investigations are carried out. Do you know Bushy, what was the process on the occasion of the first fatality?

Hare, hare @cheeerfuldoor