Saracen undertook massive hedging to buy their half of the...

Saracen undertook massive hedging to buy their half of the superpit. They bought the super pit at much lower POG. Over the Top hedging is generally a function of banking covenants. This was the case with Saracen.

I don't know if RRL undertook more than years 1.5 years of production to secure fundng.... anyone here such a long term owner to know the answer?

All things equal a typical hedging policy is 30-50% hedging of annual production rolling, to take it out to more than 1.5 years tells me they did it to build the company on the back of funding a company generating asset, as they did with Sarecn.

All speculation........... but my simple thoughts are excessive hedging is a sign of debt covenants to secure a future instead of dilution.

Which brings us to t he question, is diluution better than excessive hedging?

My answer to that is depends on the direction and price of gold. I think this time is better......debt increase was minimal - 20%, supported by 20% cash - cash on hand basically marries new debt. The cap dilution was a future (POG) proof strategy to avoid additional hedging.