You are obviously new to this stock.
Great asset. But, literally the worst uranium performer on the asx, and worst bottom 5 uranium performer globally...over several time horizons, including 5yr.
Reason: management.
I imagine, RH must be the only mining CEO, in the history of mining, globally, to have deliberately given up a mining permit and stranded his shareholders' only asset. Decimating the value of their investments.
I think, the issue is, he has no skin in the game. He has sold almost all his holdings over time, I believe. His salary is his main financial incentive as far as I can see, it's $500k/yr for doing relatively little I imagine, now that he has stranded the only asset. I'm sure it's a wonderful situation for him. But, here's the kicker...what do you think happens if this turns into an actual mine construction project, and then into an actual operating mine? You think he doesn't know he will have to move on? Now, you tell me...what incentive does a city lawyer, with zero mine management experience have, to actually see this project permited and develop into an operating minesite? The financial incentives are not aligned with shareholders is what I'm thinking.
None of what he has done makes sense to me. It has all been value destructive...look at the situation we're in, look at the share price, look at the decisions that were made.
We need a seasoned mining executive with a large shareholding in the company.
You see, I firmly believe, he would NOT have given up the mining permit, and stranded our only asset, if he owned a decent amount of stock. The pain of the financial loss, and the uncertainty of ever being able recoup his losses with the risk of an ongoing labour government in WA, would've been too high a risk for him to take.
Am I wrong? Do I make any sense?
Expand
