Ann: Non-Executive Director Appointment, page-11

There Are Owls In The Moss (Der er ugler I mosen)

I am a long standing shareholder, and after many years I've now joined HC specifically to be in the conversation of what's going on as this situation seems to be one that we should all be taking with utmost seriousness shareholders.

In Norway there is an old saying "The owls are in the moss" roughly translated as "something is not quite right".
There seems to be owls amongst the mineral sands and graphite in this case.

History shows that the share price has dropped almost 50%
History shows that the incumbent board have terminated an effective leader, who is incredibly skilled at identifying, securing, progressing and then commencing mining projects in locations that are notoriously difficult.
History shows that once Caruso exited Allied Gold the restructured share price dropped from $2.26 to 16 cents and within a couple of the years, the successful mine was closed and given to the govt for a token fee of one dollar....an echo of the current fall in share price (though for different situation)
In what way was the relationship untenable that they decided to terminate? Sounds like they are school yard bullies to be honest.

Rather than selling my holding yet, and my friends around the world doing the same thing, does anyone have any idea what the incumbent bored has as a plan?
Have they got any plans apart from the ones that Caruso created and they are now riding on as though they are trying to justify terminating a successful CEO? What opportunity have they created themselves that justifies this. Whats the plan boys, what's the plan.

What is the strategy behind terminating the guy in such a manner, when he has such a large vested interest in the company? Shareholders have obviously lost confidence going by the share price drop and although I am generally a positive guy, the board seems to have miscalculated the market reaction. Imagine if he starts to sell his shares? The market can not absorb the volume, It will be a bloodbath and we all lose.
There surely was another resolution they could have come to. Or are they not competent at managing strenuous situations? It's a fair question.
If they cant manage this and put our shareholder value at risk, then how effective can they possibly be in Africa and Norway when issues arrive that require resolution on site?

There is surely a lot of mum and dad investors who's $50,000 is now worth $25,000...this is not a good performance by the team and unless they have some super big announcement pending, then it seems like they have not only terminated a CEO but have successfully terminated the value of the company.

The latest announcement of appointment of new non executive director is yet another extremely poorly drafted announcement in a growing list of poorly drafted announcements. When people are representing you as a shareholder in a public company, you think they would be able to draft announcements with professional grammar and focused drive.

Regarding the latest announcement, in Norway we have a modern view on how you may speak of someone and I would like to know what is the point of stating :his intellect". This is incredibly racist in its context.
Apart from that, there is zero point in stating that. You are the board, It is assumed you act in best interests of the company and that you have engaged a suitable experienced and intelligent person for the role. Or are you trying to justify the appointment because you are not sure if shareholders can see through the lines?

Additionally, if you are listing someones "Diplomas" to try and justify their appointment to a public company, then it is normal and professional to acknowledge which institutions these diplomas were obtained from. Was in Oxford, was it University of South Africa, was it Pondo Land Community College? This is very relevant for us as shareholders to know, Because if it is just online diplomas etc, then perhaps they are not so relevant in in context.
This does not disparage the effort of the guy to get educated but it can be inferred they are using the guy as a puppet.
This is a dubious announcement.

At the end of the end of the day, as with all other shareholders, there is now genuine concern these guys do not have the firepower to steer this ship.
By now they should have least put out a statement regarding the 50% drop in share price to at the very least say that there is no material reason for this to happen and that all projects are still working fine etc. Keeping shareholders informed in such a situation should be a given courtesy.

These guys seem to be acting like fluffers on the set of a Ron Jeremy movie but they miss the whole point. Shareholders do not need fluffers, they only care about the value of their investment.

Enough with the fluff.


They hopefully have a plan for regaining our share value and for continued growth.

History shows this company has generally paid regular and suitably pleasing dividends. Lets see how the bank of Owl-ville maintains enough financial capacity to continue to do this, and to have a growth trajectory commensurate with the removal of the CEO.

Does anyone know anything that is even slightly positive about all this? Please comment.


Hoot Hoot
The Owls Are In The Moss