I think we can agree that we should leave geology to geologists, mining to mining engineers, and metallurgy to metallurgists.
Where we part company is on this notion that there is natural order of things in which only metallurgists can run mining companies. Someone should have told Lang Hancock, or Kerry Harmanis. It is a theory we can test against evidence; I maintain that successful mining company directors and MDs have come from a range of professional backgrounds, and the same can be said for unsuccessful ones. I don't think it helps to base decisions on confected nonsense.
Dixon, Grammer and Fitton built Kin. Something to be aware of when you buy shares in Kin, because they and their close associates still control, by my guess, 50 million shares aka votes, probably more. Now between 50 million and 80 million votes have been cast at Kin general meetings in the past so they already have 50% of the likely votes cast, even if a turnout was an unprecedented 100 million votes. There are really no large institutional holders, and it is probably no accident that no major holders have emerged from any of the capital raisings. These guys have always made it very clear that their aim was develop a mine, and they invited shareholders to join them, on the understanding that they intended to keep control of the project. Personally I liked that about Kin, and I like the record of achievements of these guys over the years.
Others might prefer a company run by Lawyers, accountants, or metallurgists. Fair enough, but if that was true I can't imagine why on earth you would have bought Kin shares.
Expand
