ring em, page-9

4Shadow, thanks for the effort to ring and let us know. I agree with turps that we expected that, but it's good to have a bit of positive news. Unfortunately, not every company is going to give us a massive upside in the time we like. I've owned properties that have done nothing, then gone up rapidly in a short space of time. And I've owned property that has doubled in a few years, and then done nothing for a long time. I think GOA is the same. Long (long) term, it's a goer (bad pun, but I had to do it). Freefire's commitment should be seen as a glass half full, rather than a glass half empty.
Are they getting a great deal? Absolutely.
Are they doing so at the expense of other shareholders? NO, unless those shareholders don't take up their entitlement. Yes, Freefire are getting a nice fee for underwriting, but are we going to underwrite $7m even for a fat fee? I'm not. So I'm glad someone else is.
Would I have preferred the company not done Bergen? Yes. Would I still feel the same if Bergen wasn't done, and the company went bankrupt instead? No.
Would I like the GFC not to have happened? Yes.
But now I'm just in fairy-wish land. Stuff happens. We now own a lesser stake of what is still a great resource and potential. And I'd much rather remain owning a few % of something, rather than 100% of nothing.

Personally, I think Freefire is a glass half full for GOA. U have no idea who they are, and they are getting a great deal, but shareholders who stay through the pain are going to be healed ... even if the healing is a long process.