What a year, page-87

SO anyone that posts or does not agrees with your points of view are now ignorant?
Would you prefer that I said, ok everyone here don't panic because Barney said it would be alright?

More to the point, I was trying to emphasize that IMO a total sale of the asset wouldn't be the best for all shareholders including those that live in countries other than Australia. We are all not in the position of packing up and moving to a friendlier tax country.
Congratulations on being retired so early and I have no doubt that everyone that works would be envious of your position.
Also bear in mind that not all people are mid way through there working life, how about I said that I am close to retiring and with my current financial situation the one off payment would bring forward my retirement.

Selling out at a share price of $1.00, I'll ask this question with the ignorant glasses on, and I also do understand wealth generators etc (I don't like being referred to as ignorant so I'll tell this little fib)
Assuming BGS totally sells the Lithium project, in my ignorance how do you see the share price being able to continue to climb without holding an asset and going back to being an explorer (pre Li acquisition where the SP was 6c)
How would BGS fit the investment profile and thesis for large brokerage firms without an asset (or asset being defined as money in the bank?) Surely they would look at more than just a PE ratio?
Money in the bank paying dividends is only good as long as there is money in the bank, how long before the "said" money paying a dividend of annual 5% runs out? , taking into consideration BGS needing to pay there greedy directors, running and exploration costs.
If you were new to the stock market would you invest in a company that had no assets and just a paying dividend?

Back to selling out @$1.00!! Many may do that, I may even do that, but guess what!!!
It would be my choice to sell at any given price, it would be better for me if I did that (being a long term holder) that would have some CGT discounts would it not? I like the thought that you can still see the share price reaching $1.00 without having an asset, for me I don't see that.
All of us ignorant share holders can only see something that was once in our hands, something the whole world wants being prised out with a dwindling share price to match it.

To all of you ignorant readers, please do not thumbs up this post, as I wouldn't want Barney to shake his head any more than he is going to whilst reading this post....

cheers