DRC risk and Ivanhoe investors >>>Agreed, TheKingpin1.
Funny, I have a couple of times in the past two months thought of doing the same (sending a letter.) I always try to take several views and typically it starts with separating the interests of the individual from the interests of the collective (both in the short and the long term.)
Individual investors have an interests to compete with each other (buying, selling, bragging about scalps, getting in low and selling high bla bla bla and all the 'bags' they make.)
Individual companies are competeting against other companies and generally will need to find the cheapest way to satisfy everyone be it ESG, cost of production, labour law etc.
Collectively, the entire world population has needs, that the persuit of individual needs is in a dialectic relationship with. People in developed countries want Teslas etc and people who mine copper (investors and miners and their countrymen want exchangeable currency to buy sustainance)
So, as you I think indicate, the world is getting tougher in terms of food and heat and water etc, which in turn causes deprivation and needs that can no longer be quickly and easily satified.
So, DRC, Peru, Chile, Brazil may, or may decide not to, take a bigger (tax of a sort) portion of copper thereby saying, essentially, if you want a Tesla you must pay us 200 pounds of copper (including infrastructure wiring) x $2 more than now (example: $400 from each of you wealthier people.)
So, this is a very elastic price. I will not change my descision to buy a top line Range Rover or a bottom line Honda based on this tax.
So, for that to happen requires less individual country competition and more marketplace derived co-operation. Of course no one forms a cartel with copper producing countries (like OPEC) but it can happen from bare bones need.
That is where your proposition aligns with my view of increased risk (for individual and fund investors.)
It works like this. A country, Peru or DRC is successful in extracting more currency from their resource sector and thereby satisfies a restless or deprived population. The Chinese would respond these days as the Americans in the past did, which is to covertly fund fascist dictators and their henchmen to supress any demands... This still can and might be what keeps prices low. On the other hand the precident might be a set of 'follow the leader' and raise taxes without killing the Goose (the foreign miners.) A gradual process like this would be best for everyone, but as we know, these things do not occur smoothly and that is where DRC risk could go up.
I am in favour of higher extraction cost globally and thus higher copper prices, such that the (probably more accuate) long term use and environmental value of copper is reflected in its price.
Cheers and good luck with your forwarding of information,
Notgnu to this stuff.
PS: PM me if you want to exchange any strategy around your campaign.
========================================================== i have captured, btw all of your posts the last 6 months
rest assured, I know the greedy people, but they are not bad people whatsoever.......they are just what they are..............
not bad people. but flaccid obese in the head, but not bad at all
but we have them on this message board, their true thoughts which are all dedicated to one thing, one goal one thing in mind:
greed..
yep, they are greedy and do not care a lick about the people of the Congo
And DO ANY OF YOU CANADIANS HAVE A CLUE WHY I KNOW THIS?
TA DA
BECAUSE NONE OF YOU EVER TALK ABOUT IT...you are all into yourselves and your money
I spent time on this MB to capture every single poster.
WE must fight for the children, there is no other issue.
The President of thd DRC will get my report. PS he knows all of this anyway, but I want to give him some back up stuff, for political enemies and the greedy corporations in canada and elsewhere...so he can fight their lobby groups. Robert Friend partnered with the Chinese for many reasons, the foremost is that they had the money and savy to pay a healthy price, and to see the future. They felt at the time I suppose, that the political risk was something that could be contained. That is their bet. However, Friedlands situation is different. Remember, he fled Mongolia with his original Ivanhoe company, having made a killing, and sure enough, the Mongolian government has been a nightmare for his former mining company, with the share down for about 8 years, and down hugely, the shareholders having been scalped by the government. Massive losses. Friendland adroitly then saw Africa as the final frontier, and made great and tremendous discoveries, but if you can recall, when this Ivanhoe, his new one went public 8 or so years ago, the stock price hit a high of 5.5 dollars U.S....and then collapsed, and today it is 6.75 cents. This is not a great increase, where you have had the S and P up 130%, and his company up 20% in 8 years. Time matters when you are an investor, and the Nasdaq as an index is up 300% so if you had just bought the Q's you would have crushed Friedland. I can assure you, his money is locked into the countries of south africa and the DRC, and he basically cannot sell a share without collapsing the share price.......if he could get out with 10 bucks a share, get all his money out, in lieu of the obvious incoming risk, he would in a Canadian Minute. But he cannot. He is trapped, at the mercy of the governments. They have his capital, the mine, which cannot be stopped, and can now do with it what they want. All of a sudden, the laws Friedland smartly bargained for, have been already thrown in the trash, and it looks like the new mining code, just 3 years old, will also be thrown in the trash. They've got Robert by the tail and he can do almost nothing. He bet wrong. His prior Ivanhoe in Mongolia he bet right, because he got out via his own sale. (although the shareholders were crushed to death.