RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Nevsun Dismisses Baseless Criticismsdigipic wrote: Yes guru, I'm sure that Blackrock et al, are all in agreement with you.....Redervoir board didn't think much of the XGC proposal in April and before, otherwise, their proposal would have been the one selected...its inconsistent for you to own something that you know very little of, except what is being reported by management. Know you think you now more.
Insofar, as the Chinese dissident,...there is nothing more that I can say...look at the facts, look at who is objecting publicly and issuing statements, which you promptly make it available in this herein board
Yes I am an RMC shareholder seeing my stock go down in value, as you and the rest of your friends try to create a quagmire.
I know *way* more about RMC then you do. My diligence goes far beyond this board. I've met management multiple times, I speak regularly with major shareholders, and I have a significant shareholding myself. I have met and spoken with some of the Brent, Adrian, and some of the other analysts covering this stock several times. I have shared opinions, thoughts and diligence on this board for over 6 years. Simply put, I am doing that again in this instance. as are several other of the long term holders and regular posters on this board. I was asked my opinion, and I gave it. The reasoning behind my decision to vote NO with my shares has been given several times. Ultimately, it comes down to the fact that I think there are more options to be explored and more value to be created for RMC. Period.
In regards to the BOD of RMC, I'm concerned that there are 3 guys on the BOD and ultimately playing a significant role in deciding the future of RMC who combined own less shares then I do as an individual, and 2 of whom put themselves forward for seats on the NSU BOD. In my opinion, that is ethically questionable, at best.
digipic wrote:
You did not post Nevun response article. I did. Thus it seems that you're posts are selectively santed to your and your friends agenda
Congratulations. I post what I find, when I find it when it has not been previously posted. Not sure why you think I would post the NSU rebuttal again a couple of hours after you had posted it, but again thanks for sharing. Thats kind of the idea of these boards to share information and opinions, good, bad, or indifferent. I guess I could accuse you of posting only postive articles in favour of the NSU proposal then?
digipic wrote:
You seem to be excuting a specific agenda of persuading readers and shareholders to vote No as it suits you. You have not given any sound reasons, as to what happens if the deal doesn't go through, as far as required funding, termination fees, etc. Are you supporting XGC bid of "alternative financing", yes or no?
I have no agenda other what I have stated previously. I've voted, others are free to vote their shares any which way they choose. As I stated here:
thorgb1 wrote: Thanks for the feedback Bendy. Personally, I don't think any of us retail guys can influence how this will play out, but I don't think there is a downside for us. Obviously, the BOD thinks the NSU bid is the way to go, so if someone wants to come over the top with a bid, it would be sort of hostile, and I'd have to think it happens soon now that the docs are out and a date is set. If we end up with NSU, they pay a healthy dividend and I have to think we could easily see 6-10 bucks a share by the end of the year as they progress the project and further define the porphyry, which FCX obviously thinks is massive as indicated by their desire to retain their piece of it. If there is another bid or we decide to go it alone, I think we should definately be trading above $10, and then in the latter scenario we could easily see 14-16 bucks by the end of the year as they progress the project. I sold a tiny bit at $9, but am holding the rest to see what happens because I just can`t see any downside to seeign this play out.
GLTA.
I'm happy to see this play out. If NSU ends up with the property, so be it, but my personal opinion is that we can achieve a faster path to a higher share price by voting NO and watching this play out, and I think the downside for us is limited at this point. The XGC PP at $8 gives us a backstop against the SP eroding much from here. Again, I did alot of research into what we were voting on which went into how I voted my shares, much of which was crystallized in the recent Haywood research:
thorgb1 wrote:
Also, consider this from a Haywood research note out today:
Our C$9.00 per share Reservoir target price reflects the market implied metrics currently associated with Nevsun’s pending acquisition bid. That said, we note Reservoir (essentially only reflecting the Cukaru Peki epithermal copper-gold project) generates a C$15.00 per share fully financed after-tax corporate NAV12% in our model.
and aligned with a very good summary of the pros of voting NO by Bendystock here:
bendystock wrote: I read through the information posted on Sedar and plan on voting no. Pretty simple really, I see no reason to sell an asset for less than 50% of what it is worth when there is now, no pressing reason to sell.
The Cukaru Peki Project has a NPV of between $679 Million and $1.632 Billion and Nevsun is offering $365 Million. (in USD)
Would be happy if Reservoir Minerals sold to Nevsun or another company for $567 Million USD putting about $12 per share CDN into my pocket. Otherwise let's keep moving towards building a mine of our own and finding out how much the porphyry is going to be worth.
I found the Background of the Arrangement (page 43-48) fascinating. I think RMC did an outstanding job of both fielding offers and finalizing a deal just in time to exercise the ROFO. At that time Reservoir needed money quickly, there was a deadline and selling shares at $9.40 and accepting a loan was in my opinion great.
Now Reservoir owns the whole Cukaru Peki asset, from the Background of the Arrangement it sounds like they would have no problem getting financing at a reasonable rate or with minimal dilution to pay back the loan and the termination fee.
I see no need to rush now, I hope that institutional shareholders agree with me and vote no or put up enough of a threat in the background to force Nevsun's hand into paying the equivalent of $12 per share.
Wishful thinking? Most likely but stranger things have happened, like drilling a hole through 10% copper.
From E-88, about page 236
Three mining phases of mining were modelled, in summary:
• The DSO Starter Mine in isolation has a post-tax NPV of USD 679 M with an IRR of 103%.
• The PEA Base Case which has additional concentrate production from the Main UZ Mine (>2.5% copper), the post-tax NPV increases to USD1,552M, and the IRR is 106%.
• The Extended Case where additional concentrate production from the Main UZ Mine (>1.0% copper), the post-tax NPV increases to USD1,632M, and the IRR is 106%.
Ultimately, we think the Timok asset is worth more then NSU is paying for it, and as long term holders we know the value of the porphyry, which NSU is effectively getting for free under the current deal, and not to mention the promising property on trend with Timok we are working in a JV with RIO. How about assigning some shareholder value to those assets? Even $12 is a steal for this property.
As to you being an RMC shareholder, I submit your first post on this board which seems very pro-NSU, and questions the valuation of the Timok asset:
digipic wrote:
Reading this board, it sounds like RMC shareholders are complaining. NSU has paid or committed to a $1 billion transaction. $535 million upfront in share dilution and cash...additional cash of around $150 million or so, will have to be paid as per agreement between Freeport and Lundin....NSU had to match the offer...thus the initial commitment is between $600-700 million. Additionally NSU is stuck for funding the project, which is estimated at least another $50 to $100 million in the next couple of years....then they have to build the mine...RMC, published a half-as*ed PEA showing $225 million to build the mine...my guess is the Feasibility study in a couple of years will show that the outlay to build the mine will be between $400 to $700 million for the 1st phase...
That;s the way I see it...
Doesn't really make it seem like you are an RMC shareholder, now does it?
As always, good luck to all, even you DixieChick if it turns out you are truely an RMC shareholder. Ultimately, at this point we are the prettiest girl at the dance and all the boys are fighting over getting a dance with us, so I don't think we can go very wrong. I just think we should be getting more for what we have, and thwe shareholders will decide which way we go which is as it should be.
TGB