Mahogany: I hear you! I myself was preparing to write a very negative post soon after this latest announcement came out, and then thought better of it. And reading AJ's brilliant post, nudged me to partake of gallows humor whimsy. I'm less upset about the announcement, as we all knew dilution was coming, and actually feel it's better for Sentient to run the show as much possible. What pushes all my buttons is the constant dearth of communication and information from the CEO. He only seems to pop up and talk to press etc. answer questions, and reveal real information when there is something positive to report and offer optimistic deadlines. Then he seems to go into the witness protection program when invariably the deadlines are not met and when things go south, and we are left in the dark for weeks and months at a time, leaving us here on HC to hazard numerous possibilities of what we might guess is going on. We have serious investments here, that none of us here can really afford to take major losses on, but most of the time we're playing guessing games with our investment because all we hear is the sound of crickets instead of real information. Dean does his best, but is hampered by what he's allowed to say. And bizarrely, he's forced to keep answering the same questions individually one by one that individual investors keep asking of him, instead of having the info widely disseminated with the imprimatur of the CEO.
I'm ticked off because, once again, here we are all huddled here in the dark over the HC campfire, divining by tea leaves our assessment about these new circumstances that we are asked to vote on and more importantly assessing our own holdings of MMC with this turn of events, without enough information.
FMW asks what happens the end of next year, when we run out of money? Good question.
Amber brings up that Les burned through all that cash on the exploratory drilling. But I remember someone posting awhile back, that MAYBE the additional drilling had to be done in order to keep the lease, which is a good point if that's the case, but we don't know if that's the case, do we?
In this new possible arrangement, we have to assess how we feel about Sentient having a great deal of power, and Les having less, which brings in accessing the CEO's management to date. Now, while true that the SP in MMC has done nothing but go ever southward since the botched CR in the spring of 2012, I can forgive ONE mistake like that, although I would truly like MORE INFORMATION on how did that happen! And from where we sit now, redomiciling to Canada doesn't seem like a wise move, and several mining companies have already redomiciled back to their original country. But times are tough in the mining sector currently, and I'm willing to give some latitude that perhaps it might be okay, in the future, when the industry turns around. I would imagine that the instos had their input and agreed and some might have actually pushed for it. Again, lack of information.
But where I start to lose real confidence in management is that us small investors are so frequently kept in the dark without regard. How can we assess are investment without solid information. Plus who the CEO is very much a part of my stock picking, and no doubt others here. There's many viable companies that I won't buy, simply by listening to the CEO on TV or radio. He or she may have a great track record, but if he seems too much like a high powered salesman, and I doubt his ability to be straightforward and leveling in what he's saying I take a pass. I don't have a problem with Les as a salesman, but unfortunately that's pretty much all we ever see, as he avails himself to questioning interviews only when things are sunny. We MMC investors already know the sunny, that's why we're investors. What we all dearly want to have is more information when it's raining!
I would love for an interviewer to ask: "Years back you announced the DFS would be released by the end of 2010. Since that time you have issued numerous more deadlines, and each time your investors found out the hard way that there still was no DFS. They sat there in the dark when the deadlines came and went, oft times with never an explanation, just a new announced later deadline, and sometimes the explanation finally came weeks more often months later. So perhaps now, now that it is hindsight, you would recap all those missed deadlines and give explanations for EACH of them to your LT holders so they can finally find out what was going on behind the curtain when they were so sorely disappointed so many times, and you were mistaken so many times. It seems legitimate that they would want to assess what the state of affairs was each time and how it was handled, although I'm sure they would have preferred it at the time they were actually buying and holding their shares. Would you particularly address and elaborate on 2 times:
#1. It seems at the AGM in 2012, you gave personal assurance to Mr. Raider Up, that the DFS would be released in a couple of weeks, which was in error. What specifically happened in those couple of weeks that halted release and why was it that your small shareholders were not even offered an explanation? Some of them even added to their position, feeling they could make a quick profit on those shares on your assurance of the imminent release, but instead took a loss when it wasn't.
#2. When then told, the DFS would be released the first quarter of 2013, your small investors waited those months, like hungry birds waiting to be fed, and when at the end of March there was no DFS, they were told the delay was only due to a board member being on an Easter vacation and unable to sign off on the DFS. What happened at MMC during his assumedly short holiday, that now was the reason for non release?
Also, as currently known, the power supply situation is halting release of DFS and slowing the project considerably. I think it was, Mr Raider Up who posted the question of, wasn't there any contingency plan for this abrupt pull out by a third party? Mr. Emery we would very much like for you to shed some light on this question.
Final question Mr. Emery. No company spends more money than they need to on their project. You decided to abandon the use of DSTD a year or so back, and go with the more expensive tailings solution. This is one of the most important decisions in a mine, and I assume you felt that a land based mine was the most prudent course. What were the reasons you chose it at the time? And now, with a shortage of funds, you've put DSTD on the table again, begging the question of what negative downside consequences are possibilities if you go with DSTD, that you previously felt were best to be avoided. A Deia Diva, whose primary concern has always been DSTD, both morally and financially as an investor, believes, by GUESSING, that she knows at least part of the reason if not the primary one. She remembers, a few years back, during the Ramu court case on DSTD, Mahogany Park posted a full page newspaper ad paid for by the landowners, that solely said: "Marengo, don't even think about it!" in regards to DSTD. Now that you are thinking about it again, after telling them you wouldn't, what is their reaction? You've spent commendable time and money in creating positive community relations, is this now in jeopardy if you chose DSTD? As you know, the Ramu verdict was extremely unpopular, and now that Ramu has commenced for awhile now dumping the toxic tailings into the their sea, the people are even more agitated siting evidence of environment degradation already, putting at risk their livelihoods and health. If you chose DSTD, by the time you would employ it, Ramu will have been using this method for several years, with no doubt even more roiling waters. Do you have concerns, that further down the road, there might be civil unrest over this issue, and even the possibility of guerrilla attacks on the mine, which has happened before in PNG? A big investor in MMC, is George Soros, who is huge environmentalist, and will he stay aboard when most environmentalists are against DSTD? What is your thinking, about long term delays and money costs, should MMC get mired in legal actions involving DSTD?" end of hypothetical interview.
No doubt, there are many questions to be asked and answered, that we don't even know to ask, because we so often don't know what's going on! It's very likely, that most of these questions, if not all, have legitimate answers, but how can we judge. It's this lack of transparency that exasperates and exhausts me, that finally has me lose restraint, and post this preposterously long post which I had no intention of doing when I started.
As most of you know, I generally post positively about MMC. And yes, contrary to this long venting on my part, I still remain cautiously optimistic about Marengo. We have a quality mine, that has the potential to be world class, and a superior registry of investors, that, no doubt, have a lot more information than we do, and they have remained on board, that indicates their optimism. Although a sad state of affairs, I'm in favor of the Sentient arrangement, and they bring additional expertise and with this they will have even more power to mind the store and management, should it be needed.
Mahogany, I started this post, with the intent to briefly respond to your latest post..... seems I got off track, a bit!!!!
I'm unsure if you are selling out completely, or just way down. Either way, I will most certainly miss your valuable input, as well as humor, and dearly hope it's just a hiatus, and not a complete goodbye! There are many knowledgeable posters here that I value, but from the get-go since I started reading HC, you have always been my most valued poster. In assessing, I always come to the same word... you are just so SAVVY! You always make sense to me, and your humor and playfulness has always been a delightful plus.
So, in hopes this will be a short see ya' later..... Aloha! Diva, a big fan
I'll will always think of you when I pop open a Corona. I'm taking a pass on fairy bread.
MMC Price at posting:
1.8¢ Sentiment: LT Buy Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)