Red flags everywhere
I gave ABD a thumbs up for the question period report, because it is actually useful to investors trying to assess risk/reward and fair value. A few comments:
Wagner and security - the responses confirm that RBX is operating in a 'wild west', currently one of the most risky and unpredictable in the world (along with Guinea and Burkina Faso). So they are hoping to stay under the radar while others fight for control of the country and its resources! Good luck. They have the audacity to talk about trust with communities when they have a history of fatal confrontation. And the Malian workers? As if we didn't know there are Malian workers - and they are the group most likely to shut down a mine in West Africa.
Could Taurus push Robex out of business? - Of course the simple answer is yes, which is why they have to give an evasive answer. I know that Taurus are professionals (I have worked with them on two of their projects) and they always get their money back - no matter what happens.
How many years are left? - It's already been years since they published an estimate of how many years are left. Since then, they have failed to make any useful discoveries, and costs have risen enormously - making ore that may have looked economic before to be no longer economic. So it's intentional that they don't want ordinary shareholders to know how much time is left. (Hint: it may not be years.) Already, they have some cash-positive quarters and some losing quarters. It wouldn't even take a major event to force a shutdown for economic reasons, but of course major events can happen at any time. My guess is that IF they manage to get Kiniero operating, they would immediately shut down Nampala with a big sigh of relief.
Acceleration of drilling at Kiniero? - The response confirms that RBX is hanging by a thread financially. The only possible argument for investing in RBX (which is essentially a very expensive exploration company) is the hypothetical exploration upside. But now it is confirmed that even in the best case scenario, it will be several years before they can even consider drilling.
Dividends? - Dream on. They made a mistake before of paying a dividend they couldn't afford, and soon went back to borrowing money to pay their bills.
Establishment agreement? - This is a huge unknown that makes it very uncertain whether a mine can be built and make money. They are dealing with a very hungry government who wants a bigger share of resource revenue. RBX is telling shareholders that the project will be tremendously profitable, so how can they tell the government that there is not much profit to be made there? If they do come to an agreement, it could make RBX's chances of becoming profitable even slimmer. And just like Taurus, the government can easily put RBX out of business by simply saying 'No', or by sticking to a high price. The gold deposit isn't going anywhere, it will remain in Guinea, and the government can find another partner to try and develop it.
One final comment concerns something that was in the preceding AGM report: "17% of the project is completed, all financially supported by the bridge loan from Taurus Mining." This confirms what I have been saying all along - Nampala is NOT contributing funds to build the new mine. In a good quarter, Nampala can barely pay RBX's operating and maintenance costs. In a less than good quarter, RBX has to borrow money just to stay alive. The new project is all being charged to the Taurus credit card.