Hi Raufoss,
I somewhat agree with your comments, but you would have benefited from coming to the AGM.
>>"Up on rumour, down on fact" has now unfortunately become the norm.
Yes. However, if the company had come up with a potential reserve statement, i'd bet that the price would have gone up on that announcement. Did you know that FMG used 800x200 metres spacing for inferred resources, and infilled to 400x100 spacing for indcated resources? UMC drilled closer than that in quite a few places -- so I really don't know what they are playing at telling us its too early to infer anything.
On a positive note, I guess its good that they are not giving pie in the sky predictions (such as GIR's 1000Mt based on rockchip samples). If they want to be taken seriously by BHP and RIO geologists, I think that they need to act responsibly. These boys know what they're looking for when it comes to a serious Iron ore deposit (let's face it - we don't!) - and they are very interested in Railway.
>>Can all those Hotcopper members who attended the AGM now admit that they were suckerpunched into not venting their collective spleen at certain sections of management.
We did ask questions. But rather than ask accusatory questions defaming the character of the directors, we stuck to questions regarding hard facts on their iron ore and bauxite tenements and projected expenditure. I'd love to have asked more questions ..but was informed the coffee was getting cold.
I spoke to Terry Hogan directly and expressed my disappointment at his selling. I think others spoke to Matt too. Hogan's clients invested in UMC before it became United Kimberley Diamonds. They got in at 10c. Who can blame them for taking a 10-15x profit.
I think Phil Crabb is also angry with Hogan for selling. That is why he wasn't amused at Terry to standing up at the end to get his 'proud of you son' speech in.
>I seem to recall a sense of unrest prior to the AGM at the
>possibility of Hogan being appointed CEO. How come this >never arose at the AGM.
Matt Hogans presentation was weak as p!ss. A slide on how much they 'might' spend next year, followed by a very bad commentary on the share price which completely omitted the day the announcement came out. I doubt he impressed anybody in that room (and there were a lot of people there).
However, Matt Hogan was credited with getting the deal done to acquire the Iron Ore tenements. THAT is why he deserves the benefit of the doubt.
The appointment of Hogan as a CEO shows clearly that this company is not interested in mining. They appear more interested in doing a deal to sell all the ore to BHP once a JORC reserve is proved up. This is arguably a better approach than mining. For example at camp hill:
If BHP mine their 2/3 of Camp Hill and UMC mine their 1/3: then you have 2 sets of capex and opex costs for 2 seperate projects. It makes more sense for BHP to cost out the Camp Hill project, make UMC pay 1/3 of the costs, and pay them the net difference (ore value - costs). This approach removes many risks for UMC. BHP would also like that because then there's no arguments about railway access, and they get to retain their iron ore negotiating monopoly with the Chinese smelters.
>This unrest seems to have been "placated" by the quote >unquote "Broome is nice in April".
The unrest was placated by the willingness of all the UMC staff - geologists and directors, to stay back and answer everybody's questions. I spent around 45 minutes talking with Alan Birchmore, Jim, and Barry.
I have been to a few AGMs, and never seen such openness. If the person you were talking to didn't know the answer to the question you were asking, there was someone else in the room who did. The company is aware that some people like to do 'hard research' into the iron ore, which is why they gave us a 40 page document of educational material on it. Very enlightening. It would appear that Milli Milli is just like Weeli Wolli.
>PS This broadside is not a personal attack on the Hotcopper >users mentioned. The fundamentals remain the same. I >invested in UMC on Bauxite, not Iron Ore.
Like you I think that the Bauxite is the big thing here. That's why I wanted to speak Alan. My impression is that he concentrates on personal relationships and a non-confrontational approach to make this bauxite project work. I think he'll do it. If he leaves - goodbye bauxite IMO.
The Bauxite is what makes UMC a long-term hold in my portfolio. So far, management are reaching the milestones that they need to. I wouldn't go so far as some on here that say that now that Norsk is aboard "it's all a done deal".
The bauxite success is 1% to do with the resource drilling and benefication, and 99% to do with Alan Birchmore's and Norsk's ability to harness the political will to get the project approved. Right now, I think they can do it.
>I hope you guys give management the respect they deserve when you contact them.......
If we were not happy Raufoss, we could call an EGM quicker than you can say Boo! There was a lot of networking between shareholders going on. You'd be surprised at the size of the holdings that some people have.
For now I am giving management the benefit of the doubt. Barry Fehlberg has a very different communication style to Jim Richards.
Wait for a few of his announcements to come out between now and April (March is when I expect the Railway assay lab results, and April is when I expect them to give a little more detail on their 20,000m drilling campaign).
They need to join-the-dots for the investors, deliver on their promises, and come up with a few positive surprises. If they do that, I am sure many of us longer term holders will continue to hold/accumulate.
Those directors gave themselves 75c options. They won't be worth much if they don't deliver. Those options have caused the directors interests to become firmly aligned with those of the shareholders.
>>DYOR
Absolutely.
>>Raufoss
Joel
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?