RE:RE:Burkina Faso securityWell stated Marben
To which I would add...
There are risks in almost every significant mining district in the world...ranging from political to environmental. For example South America - similar but different issues. Mexico, same. Russia, Serbia, etc. etc. Less military or physical security risk perhaps, but equally challenging issues with local and federal governments & populations.
Even in "safer jurisdictions" like Canada, Australia, and the US, issues can and do arise (local indigenous, extreme weather, environmentalists, bureacracy, etc.)
And then there are the higher cost regions, due to: mountainous terrain, undergound mine costs & risks, shortened drilling seasoins, higher labour costs, shortage of workers, etc. etc.
Endeavour Mgt/, together with African billionaire investors are, for the most part, managing well through the conditions and risks that come with their chosen territory.
No risk, no reward (see Rick Rule)
marben100 wrote: Security issues in BF are nothing new. A strong part of the rationale for Endeavour's takeover of Semafo was that the larger group would be more influential with government and Endeavour had better security protocols.
The threat around the Boungou mine is extreme - and Endeavour has put in place security measures to meet it, e.g. flying workers in and out, rather than using roads.
Thanks for highlighting the government resignations - I hadn't spotted that story:
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/12/15/violence-sahel-burkina-faso/ Under LSE rules, Endeavour is required to make a news release if operations are significantly affected, so it's safe to assume that they're not - at least for now.
The terrorist/instability threat in West Africa is a factor that will tend to make Endeavour's shares trade at a discount to those of miners operating in safer jurisdictions. However, it's a trade-off between the quality of resources available in West Africa vs the security and political risk. So far, Endeavour has shown itself to be well capable of managing those risks.
Cheers,
Mark