Hi RocketMan00001,Yeah possibly over analysed. I read all...

Hi RocketMan00001,

Yeah possibly over analysed. I read all announcements at face value and then again in context. If things start to smell off I double check past announcements. There are a few difficulties preventing me from swallowing this announcement at face value.

ASX listing Rules
The specific point of 5.19.2 is when news contains a change to MRE or ore reserves (that underpin previously announced production targets or financial forecasts) but management maintains that its assumptions regarding the forecasts are unchanged. In the eyes of ASX todays announcement is deemed to contain updated/new information, whether we think so or not. LPD has carefully worded it to sound as though nothing has changed, but it is only their assumptions that they say have not changed...at this time. Reading the plain words there is clearly a change to the underlying inputs to original P1 financial forecasts (i.e. size of MRE and ore reserves) and management clearly points to an upcoming event (comprehensive review) which give them a platform to change to their assumptions... the assumptions they are saying haven't changed as at todays date. Technically true.

Am definitely not picking a fight so bear with me.

How can the underlying input change but management maintain assumptions remain unchanged?
The extension drilling at Helikon now seems to be linked to P1 economics. That is clearly a new development. Happy to be corrected but this hasn't been reported before. I would support my opinion by pointing to previous LPD announcements declaring that P1 is “fully funded till FID”, or declaring in entitlement offer documents that funds applied to Karibib extension drilling are to “define a resource that supports a P2 plant”, etc. In todays announcement they even go to the effort of explaining how their assumptions about pit shells and cut-off grade influenced P1 DFS. Today we hear, ever so gently, that extension drilling is now somehow linked to P1 economics and somehow a pre-cursor to a comprehensive review of P1 economics? Let's be real. Optimising pit shells and adjusting cut-off grades are largely desktop exercises. Extension drilling is clearly more time consuming and capital intensive. It’s hard to skim over todays announcement without noticing that one of the three changes that warrant a "comprehensive review" of P1 economics is a significant item of work.

So what who cares?

Linking changes to investor expectations
Even if we skim over the range of possible (but undisclosed) reasons for the changes, there are consequences that should modify the expectations of reasonable shareholders. Firstly, the time that management says will elapse until the comprehensive review can begin. Secondly, the costs. There will be questions of how long a comprehensive review might take to complete (once it begins), and then what (if any) additional tasks (found once the comprehensive review is complete) that might be required to shore up any weaknesses uncovered. All normal stuff… but time and re-work puts an additional drain on working capital. We must acknowledge that these are additional changes that flow from the news contained in todays announcement.

Tip of the ice berg (past behaviour)
We know from experience that we need to carefully read LPD announcements as the details section of announcements regularly contain little time bombs obscured by a smoke screen of deflections and distractions.Should we now expect a slow drip feed of news which gradually shifts the goals posts? We know from past routines that core messages are broken into isolated parts and then sprinkled across several unrelated announcements, invariably buried deep in the details. Would not be brave enough to take a bet but leopards and spots come to mind.

Hopefully that helps convey my point of view. Watching closely.

Go the slow ‘pus
AM74