merger, page-14

In the last sane announcement we were told Directors did not wish to increase the shares on issue to fund mine developement.
I took this to mean some sort of supply price discount in a forward sales hedge contract ,something that was dooable and fair to both partners.
We were also told a target of 40mill ton annual production was on the cards, a target Ansteel ,I'm sure would have wanted fast tracked.
With 500million shares $2 a share yearly profit was easily envisioned for future years.GBG would have been the darling of the super funds with a $30 to $50 sp.
Taking the monetary inflation into account which has yet to be expressed as price inflation the figures would have been much larger.
Including Lodestone GBG has in excess of 1 bill tons Fe eqivalent,so theres 50 years of production with your JV partner the guranteed buyer.
Imagine the empire they could have built over the years re investing part of the large profits as well as paying huge dividends.

I think it is reasonable to equate 2 tons of Fe eqivalent per GBG share, does SDL have 3 to 4 billion tons?

To start a new life with 1.4 billions shares on issue , before a mine has even been built is La La land stuff.When I first invested in GBG there were 100million shares.
Will the new GBG be the first trillion share company?
There is something very wrong if this has been arranged so GBG holders cannot vote,I thought increases in aurthorised share capital had to be voted on .