Ann: High Grade Discovery 4m @ 7.0% Cu - Exploration Update, page-142

There has been a more than striking parallelism in the development of the SP of CNB via HMX for around 12 months. Anyone who wants to believe in coincidences should do so. However, it is very likely that certain "ideas" have been exchanged for some time.

12 months ago there was already a discussion as to whether CNB was overvalued or HMX undervalued. At that time I was in contact with Dan (the MD of HMX) who said that HMX was undervalued (and CNB was probably more correctly valued). At that time there was also a resource update from Kalman - which was completely ignored by the market.

The SP of HMX as well as CNB was driven down during at least 2 phases with little volume. I know exactly what happened with HMX - the SP was deliberately moved downwards.

The question now is who could have an interest in a "transaction" taking place at a much lower market cap. The smaller "the number", the greater the (future) multibagger effect! See also SP of HMX!

There seems to have been a divergence in the development of the two SPs since the merger discussions were announced. HMX rather stable, CNB further down. I had already noted that a convergence of the two market caps might be a prerequisite for a merger under equals.

However, my (logical) hope was that HMX would rise and CNB would remain the same.

If you take out the cash in the bank at CNB (the expenses are already planned as I understand) and value Kalman at 0, then CNB's market cap would be 60m. HMX's would be around 35m. CNB's SP would then be around 30c (interestingly, exactly where there is a gap). That would be another 35% lower as current SP. Of course, this is just speculation.

However, if the divergence in the development of the two SPs continues over the next few weeks - "to the disadvantage" of CNB - then this could be a possible outcome before an announcement is "surprisingly" made.

I am pretty sure that "calculations" are already being made in the background - and have been for some time. It would not be the first time (but at least the third) that I have been able to "follow" such a development.Often to the disfavour of small shareholders.

We should pay close attention to the "divergence". From my point of view, there is always someone who knows more or is closer to the action. In the end, a smiling third party pops up and snaps up the whole thing at bargain level.

What is really going on here....?

DYOR