RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Is NG already 'mining' CBGDF? You maybe correct that CBGDF directors would vote yes on a bid of $150m (= approx., US 0.93 per share on approx., 160m shares), but Nordgold is known for their focus on a SP premium bid related to a 20 day average. Today, at about a max., of 0.38 that means NG would have to make an offer approx.,150% above the present 20 day average to get in the low 90s. NG has usually offered in the 25 - 40% premium range.
Are you wondering why the SP has dropped so low down to the high 0.20s from the low 0.80s? Why would anyone be selling shares down in this range if they were looking to make any serious profit from such trades (especially with so few shares being traded daily)? I would suggest there is another potential reason...
To get a 0.90 bid presently will I think need a major bidding war, which means Guistra has to convince a mid tier/major(s) re., the value of the CBGDF FG holding. At this time I don't think the immediate case is convincing enough, but the value will go up with the more oz., data and mine progress events that arrive. Further, such improving mine data will also favorably impact any CBGDF loan terms for reconstruction. Conceivably, 'first spades in' could be 2 to 2.5 years away so there is no rush for financing or initiating debt. Again, any loan or streaming terms will become more favorable with increased P&P - M&I data re., the amount per oz charged and or the length of any financing period (i.e., predicted years of mine production).
Notice that CBGDF also recently sold off approx., 2.75m of its approx., 7.5m AUAU share holding to finance its costs as it awaits progress in FG. Again, there is no pressing financial demands for CBGDF to do anything as NG takes care of all mine related expenses until actual mine building starts. Remember CBGDF and AUAU are two totally separate companies so the finances of one cannot be used directly to benefit the other. I am not aware that AUAU has any holdings in CBGDF so a FG sale would benefit only the CBGDF shareholders; there would be no impact on AUAU re., improving exploration financing etc. CBGDF is not holding AUAU back now. At most the joint directors might bring some $$ after a FG sale to AUAU to finance more shares on a private/secondary, but I don't think that would be much. Consequently, we must now see CGBDF and AUAU as two totally separate companies with different goals. Likewise, the joint directors legally should operate with separate mindsets for FG and Nevada.
Overall, I am hoping like me that Guistra and the other directors see FG as a long term sale (they have held it for 10 + years already and should not be given away because of impatience). IMHO CBGDF is no longer an exploration company (despite the claims on the website); that is why we have been given AUAU for that explicit exploration purpose. For me FG is now a one off event; I agree not a miner (but rather sold and gone). However, again, with patience, nerve, increasing ozs., gold price, and mine progression, shareholders could well be looking at a share price sale offer in the $2 + range, which could happen within the next two years. Yet, today NG could conceivably come in at around 0.50!