not the 1st time a company has advised the market on something that didn't happen. The thing is, most companies (particularly speculative mining companies) would have had their share price ABSOLUTELY HAMMERED if they simply didn't produce anything for an entire quarter after advising shareholders they would. Especially when most holders spent the better part of 2006 sitting there, waiting on every word that these directors told us regarding the first gold pour. Instead, they produce nothing? and the way I look at it (call me naive or impatient) the only thing that has kept this company from trading at 35c is this offer - no matter how unfair you see it.
Think about the price action leading up to the takeover offer... IBR steadily traded down from all time highs to the low 60c mark all on advice that the company was for the first time, in production. This dec announcement should have set the price flying and we all sat around waiting for the subsequent re-rating.... instead, IBR loses about 40% of its value over the next few months. Did that not set some alarm bells ringing? Then we have an explanation from the directors themselves stating that a large holder was selling, and this was responsible for the decline. Was the holder advised that in fact no production would be reported after the first quarter? I think so.
If a decent management team takes over my shares, and they ACTUALLY GET THE GOLD OUT OF THE GROUND, then I'm quite happy to have the present value be based on the 4 x 25c TMR shares. If TMR didn't put in an offer, and IBR sat around and did nothing in the 1st quarter, would IBR be trading at 100c? Hell no. By the end of the year, this value will no doubt be 4 x 35c TMR shares. I can't believe you people can see growth in IBR with the current management based on the BS we've seen from them. Non disclosure is bad news - always.
IBR
iberian resources limited
