boring till second half of year, page-40

Missing the point? far from it.

Small caps like IGR dont just knock on the doors of banks, funds etc and say 'hand me over the cash or else'. They need to 'sell' their story to other institutions who then decide whether they will invest or not. How do you know that CC didnt try to get a larger amount during this period, this is what i am trying to figure out from your critisisms? How do you know that that wasnt the max that could be raised? Thats why i have highlighted the period in which the raising took place, right at the beginning of the GFC.

Now lets say he could have raised a substantial amount of money for development. So when does he start to develop? Do you think the insto's will just say 'ahh CC, just start whenever you feel like it'?, no i dont think so. So now we come to the question, when should have development started? Well, if you had wanted it to start back then,, then the cash costs of the development would have been much higher, i.e a lot more money then now would have had to have been raised back then!!!! Remember the boom? It was rocking and rolling back then with shortages of everything from people, equipment to tea bags. Now imagine for one sec, locking in a lot of contracts back at late 2007 levels?? The costs of the operation would have been a lot more than now.

Now who would have thrown around the critisisms that development shouldnt have been started? Well im willing to wager the same people that are complaining now about not having raised more money back then.

The management of IGR can only work within the parameters that exist in a given period of time. Personally, i think that it was sheer brilliance that $31mill was raised during a period lasting 8 months where IGR traded above 35 cents AND AND AND after the beginning of the biggest financial crisis in history. Can you imagine the salesman skill of Chris? this guy sold $31 mill worth of stock ( the most IGR had ever raised by a long shot previously) to instos just as capital was getting tight. You should forget your 55 cents, as i have mentioned already, IGR lasted about 90 days at that price point which was VERY volatile, instos most certainly would have wanted a substantial discount to that - they are not completely stupid. Besides, how do you think they calculate the price of raisings? They apply discounts to volume weighted averages over a specified period. If you have a look at the pricing action of the stock then you will see that 45cents was a darn top price to pay at the time.

Now the biggest point your missing is that in this raising the people that got burnt were the instos and sophisticates and not ordinary shareholders. I mean how great is that? You probably forgot, but during that period i remember the constant and constant complaining of how CC sold out to his mates giving them shares at 45 cents and none to shareholders,, LOL. Remember that? Well lets remember that they purchased IGR at almost the top.

People should also remember that almost none (or none) of the raisings that IGR has undertaken with ordinary shareholders have been ABOVE 25 cents. That means that at todays prices, any shareholder that took part in a capital raising (remembering that the one at 45 cents was to instos) is actually showing a profit. AND thats with a doubling to tripling of the total stock out there on issue. Dont know about you, but thats a pretty good result. I am quite sure that hardly any CEO's out there on the TOTAL ASX can claim that distinction of never raising about todays share price in their history.

Dilution has been disappointing which i agreed with, and hence dont know why i am being told i miss the point, BUT i dont share your reasons about shoulda, woulda, coulda because even in hindsight it was near impossible to raise a susbtantial amount of money without a concrete plan on where that money was going to be used. I thought i had highlighted that in my previous post. For a small cap like IGR that money was substantial at the time when looking at their raisings historically. You dont raise money for the sake of raising it when capital is scarce.

Dont know about you, but getting paid $350,000 as CEO to constantly have to explain to shareholders shoulda, woulda, coulda, when it is unnecessary and having to deal with phone calls and emails about unwarranted complaints WHILE running the company to build a mine with government regulations and supplier contracts slapping your face, just aint worth it IMO. What a deal shareholders are getting.

Again, i aint happy about dilutions, but realistically there wasnt much that could have been done. Price targets should be adjusted accordingly.