RE: SURVEY - Who is voting against the deal? Hi, we've already been doing this.
This is the current list I have. (See below) I apologies if I've missed anyone. The posts have been going fast and furious the last few days and I've been preoccupied. Please PM me or post any updates.
I believe that is the correct strategy to attach ourselves to Sprott and the other funds who have already come out against this. Any corporate action we take will need their support. So hopefully they can lead this. As they already have stated their opposition there is a reasonable chance of this imo. But we do need to make contact and pledge our support in a larger sense. I would like to see us get to the 5 mil threshold as well as a good first target.
Btw I believe we would only need 5% to call a special general meeting vs 10%, which is required to call a general meeting. This is for specific business, such as we would have in voting to elect a new slate of directors. However, we have to have this ready and candidates that the funds would support. So we need their input and likely lead.
Whoever posted the link to that law site stating the rules please do so again if it is handy for everyone new.
Either way, we have this with the funds coming out opposed and our and likely others opposition this deal looks like it has a low chance of success going forward now.
As another poster pointed out, we already have over 50% of the shares needed to absolutely block the MWS deal, which in turn would prevent the GDO deal as they are contingent on one another. Therefore they need 2/3s of all TOTAL shares not pledged,(excluding Sprott group), from other funds and minorities cast FOR it to get it voted through. And based on the feelings and anger I have seen expressed here, I highly doubt that is going to happen. Plus, as not everyone will even vote, the remaining percentage needed of those that do vote will be even higher. However, we absolutely need to be proactive and ensure this is the case and not be overconfident.
Nobody it seems is for it, except for the odd person who just bought, or those that are obviously bond holders or related parties like that AIG guy form yesterday. My guess was he was from Simmers or Gold One btw as he seemed to focus on that deal.
But to say that all buyers now are going to vote yes is totally misleading. Not everyone has a short term perspective. I have added and am not going for the quick gain, as to me its pretty easy to see the value behind this. Especially if you plug in the values Sprott and Olma put on the assets. Diluting the whole thing at .20c that leaves a residual enterprise value of around 69c a share. And who is to say what the debt will convert at. If the funds were smart and it came to it. They could easily pump up the share price for peanuts compared to their funds under management. Our whole market Cap is 35m and when you consider 50% is in the Sprott group funds, AGA, FN and Simmers, who likely won't be selling. Each fund putting 5-10m in could drive the share price over 50c easily. Which then changes the Enterprise value/ share to 1.27, and a dilution of 300m shares, from 750m that will need to be issued at .20c. Hey at a dollar, the residual is 1 75 after dilution if we converted there. They would be making money on every share bought. So it isn't just manipulation. Bet it would make the 2012 note holders, wet their pants. For anyone who was here a year ago when we went from around 70s-1.30 in a week on massive volume, you'll know this isn't as far fetched as it seems. 40m shares in one day including ATS if I remember correctly.
A lot less scary here, and really smart trading and business sense. Hey, and if they pushed it higher, the Enterprise value only gets better. Ultimately it is in every current shareholder's interest to go along with this too. Even AGA now as it increases the value of their current stake. Although they have to realize they can't steal MWS for 335 m, when it has a npv of 700m. I had to laught when the reporter referred to it as it as "a so called NPV of 700m".
And as for insolvency. Just shut EZ if it continues to be as big a cash drain. Problem solved. Then we can then take our time selling it. On the plus side though, there have been no work interruptions at all in the first. So they must be doing better then Q3 in which we saw several accidents and interruptions. And they actually did have 4 million in cash flow from operations last quarter overall as a company, when they were selling over 40% of the gold from Ez at $400 bucks. Now reduced to 7%. So who knows...
FYI everyone.
Use of Proceeds
Inclusive of the initial public offering in December 2006, First Uranium has raised over $835 million to date. At the end of Q2 2012, $440 million of the funds raised had been utilized at MWS primarily on the capital expansion project and $270 million of the funds raised had been utilized at the Ezulwini Mine on the rehabilitation and re-engineering of the mine’s main shaft, the building of the gold and uranium plant and pre-production costs. The Corporation used $125 million to fund costs relating to operating activities at the Ezulwini Mine, which currently still exceed its cash revenues generated, and general and working capital requirements
So we're just finally getting everything up and running and we're going to give it away... I think not.
| Jeed | 26400 | | JBBminer | 120000 | | uranicynic | 68500 | | stude | 300000 | | Critical_Mass | 584816 | | Colt 451 | 300000 | | Lefmike | 126000 | | narmac | 181000 | | nimble_trader | 288000 | | ecolo | 750000 | | Billyk | 200000 | | dkolish | 116000 | | | 3060716 | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |