RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:OlieBollenBilly and the Wisguy You know the deal here. And you also know I can be an a$$hole .
When I detect a "woodie", I get nervous and spring into action. A woodie that has been rendered limp is no threat to a healthy a$$hole.
I am all about family planning on this board. The natural way.
Tx
Harmonicaa wrote:
TXRogers wrote: A woodie? You think so, BB?
That's not a very good thing to add to "the list" . A list that comprises of:
- admission to not holding any Novo shares,
- not giving a fuk about this investment ,
- demonstrating antisocial behavior against Swedish kids that recommend stocks to family and friends.
- and bringing up a seemingly endless number of tangential issues masked in disingenuous curiosity.
But maybe you're correct. My matinee idol good looks, rapier wit, infectious charm, and high intellect has often had that effect on the more vulnerable types. As well as my overwhelming modesty.
What can we do, partner? You seem to be lightening up on the bottle, Pooh Bear and the horned Village Idiot are MIA, and Novo is still kicking tires down in Aussie per-owned vehicle shops.
All that is left to play with these days of endless rain are second stringer posters.
Rain, rain, and more rain.
Tx
OlieBollenBilly wrote:
TXRogers wrote: And I am unsure of the point here?
I believe everyone is aware that an owner of a mining operation is responsible for the clean up and reclamation of the properties when the mining has finished. That's the business in any developed jurisdiction.
Like many countries, the Australia government technically ownes the lands where mining operations take place. The properties are leased to the operator for the purpose of resource extraction, sale, and taxation.
So, Novo investors don't need to dwell on the aspect of cleanup costs just yet. It is a normal function of mining, or more specifically the completion of mining. Most normal investors here are more interested on Novo building a profitable mining business, not shutting one down. Nor are we interested in Novo acquiring non performing assets that come with costs.
I suggest you do the same.
Tx
Redflame wrote: The following is taken from the MOY 2018 Annual Report:
Site rehabilitation
The Company records the present value of the estimated cost of legal and constructive obligations to rehabilitate and restore the operating location for areas disturbed by mining activities. The nature of rehabilitative activities includes dismantling operating facilities, closure of plant and waste sites and restoration, reclamation and revegetation of affected areas. The provision is the best estimate of the present value of the expenditure required to settle the rehabilitation obligation at the reporting date, based on current legal requirements and technology.
When the liability is initially recorded, the estimated cost is capitalised by increasing the carrying amount of the related mining asset. Over time, the liability is increased for the change in present value based on the discount rates that reflect current market assessments and the risks specific to the liability. This increase in the provision due to the passage of time is recognised as a finance cost in the statement of comprehensive income. Additional disturbances or changes in rehabilitation costs will be recognised as additions or changes to the corresponding asset and rehabilitation provision when incurred prospectively from the date of change.
Lot's of fancy talk for somebody's got to come up with $20 million for rehabilitation of the open pits, drill holes, and underground mine shafts plus leveling the mill. Now for all you invested in Novo, you're hoping that the mill won't be demolished for 50 years. Don't know if you agree Tx but for me, the Notes to financial statements leave a lot to be desired as to explaining to readers how the numbers were derived.
You can bet that the Australian Dept of Mines is very interested in who's going to clean up the mess. You can also bet the clean-up cost was a point of contention during negotiations. Because the negotiations have dragged on for so long, it looks like Novo will pick up the tab because it wants certain tenements that MOY has in addition to the mill. My guess is Novo will wind up paying around $75 for the mill and tenements it wants. Might be a good deal, might not. If you look at Beaton's Creek's resources, then the cost currently is $75 an ounce. Not bad at all, unless Sumitomo get's a 40 percent off the top. That would be almost like usury but nobody here seems to mind
Tx, what people want to know is whether he has hemmeroids. And since he has woodie for you pls ask him.
Monica
Jeez Tx, I drank 3/4 of a fkn bottle tonite. And if I didnt know better I would think you wanted to argue with me. But I cant. Because Im hammered. Just on principle I will buy 300 shares tomorrow. But then I am going to give you a really hard time.
Monique
zzz