We are all operating from memory here as we have been riding this horse for so long.
I do think it was more than a 5% add-on because going back I think the project originally started out as a potential uranium play?
The election was called early because the coalition collapsed triggered I think by GGG/ ETM ramping up rhetoric about uranium mining. Uranium was certainly the issue that blew up Siumut as an electoral force and I can remember thinking at the time, why are GGG/ETM pushing this so hard?
To me, it was pure hubris and the tone of the messaging was too forceful, and I remember thinking they should hedge their bets and back off once the election was called. As I said previously, what you need with management is a team that can read the tea leaves and not a bunch of gung-ho cowboys thinking they can ride it out.
It was obviously too late to come out after IA had won and say - 'we really didn't mean it' - and we can restore the uranium to the tailings, when the party that won the election by painting the company as a bogeyman now holds the reins.
That said, I still think the legislation IA introduced is challengeable, but also think the GGG/ETM management at the time contributed to where we now find ourselves and they shouldn't be absolved from blame.
ETM Price at posting:
4.5¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)