I agree that Strike has a great future -but only if it survives....

I agree that Strike has a great future -but only if it survives.

After the AGM Stu spoke about Ocean Hill and I was surprised with hisenthusiasim -subject to the 3D .

He also made clear that any problems with Gina were now behind them andthere was reasonable cooperation.

That said I am firmly of the view that STX has a snowflakes chance inhell of survival.

Its seems to me that once the prohibition of export from the Perth basinis lifted, then the move will come.

I think a tell-tale sign of that was MinGina allowing TPD to be takenover by Strike- without a suggestion of a contest.

Why would they allow Stx to get that additional cash flow strength andmake it more difficult to deal with.

It’s like they just wanted that dag end dealt with by Strike before theymade their move.

Though MinGina do not in anyway collude they just happen consistently tobe thinking along the exact same lines time after time.And their respectivepositions always supports the other.

They seem to have a telepathy which is astounding in thebusiness world.I would never have picked Ellison to be so sensitive-huge levelof EQ.

And they have mastered the MinGina 'pincer' move.One makesthe T/O play and the other sells into it.

They have obviously got big-huge- plans with lithium, however theexport of LNG from an onshore field would be potentially better.

I suspect they will do it together-I think CE has said that.

Below are a number of examples of their level of cooperation.I justgrabbed some examples of the posts showing connections.

Who knows but if Gina takes over Strike, is there anything to stop Stufrom being the managing director of the gas department?

Over these holidays I’ve wondered how willthat STX T/O move occur.

There are the two likely methods-the cash t/o which is Gina’s provincefor the obvious reason that she has $20 billion of cash.

The other being an offer of shares -whichsuits MinRes as it can do that.

There now appears to be another method of T/O in use andthat’s the Scheme of Arrangement.

That I think was used for NWE and isbeing used for the Azure T/O.

In fact we used that method on Talon.

As detailed in other posts it works asfollows-

For the scheme to be approved, a resolution in favour must bepassed at the scheme meeting by shareholders by both:

· 75% of the votes cast on theresolution; and

· more than 50% in number of the targetshareholders voting on the resolution (in person or by proxy).

Thismethod is I think good for the bidder.But I suspect it will be difficult to useon STX given there are a lot of strong and wealthy hands with big holdings inSTX.

Theworld is full of surprises and I pray that the Japanese will move before orsoon after MinGina.Hopefully they won’t do a deal-I think she did a deal inAzure with SQM.

Butmore likely Gina will make a bid and MinRes will also then buy shares forcingthe price up.

MinReswill keep buying and get to 19% approx without making a bid.

Istress there will be no collusion-just great minds thinking alike.

Ginathen will up the offer to whatever the price STX is trading at and to giveMinRes a minor profit.

MinReswill sell into the offer- certainly if a sale gets Gina to 90%.

Thequestion is will Gina get to 70% so that the MinRes shares make the vitaldifference.

Whoknows, but if it doesn’t get there she could crash the SP by withdrawing theoffer.A version of that occurred to Liontown.

RECENT PAST CONNECTIONS/CO-OPERATION:

NORTH WESTENERGY:

‘Hancock— which is also on the Norwest share register with a 3 per cent stake —currently has the upper hand for Warrego, Strike’s partner in the proposed WestErregulla gas development neighbouring Lockyer Deep, after gazumping Beach’sincreased offer two weeks ago with a higher $342m cash bid.

MrEllison said on Friday MinRes was “doing a lot together” with Hancock in mining“and no doubt there would be an opportunity” to cooperate on gas. “I mean wecan work with them, but I haven’t had a discussion with them on the PerthBasin,” he said.’

WARREGO:

‘Asurprise move by Chris Ellison’s Mineral Resources to sell shares in WarregoEnergy into Hancock Energy’s cash takeover offer just three weeks after buyingthem at a higher price has handed majority control of the in-demand WestAustralian gas junior to Gina Rinehart’s Hancock Energy.

Thedecision by MinRes helped take Hancock’s interest in Warrego to 50.54 per cent,marking a milestone in the drawn-out $438 million takeoverbattle for Warrego against the target’s jointventure partner, Strike Energy.

MinRes,which provides mining services to Hancock Prospecting, declared in a filing tothe ASX on January 17 that it had acquired shares in Warrego on the market inthree tranches that worked out at an average price of between 38.5¢ and 39.24¢apiece. It previously bought a larger tranche of shares at 35¢, taking theaverage price across all the holding to below 36¢.

MineralResources declined to comment on Monday, and Hancock Energy director StuartJohnston said he had no explanation for the company’s decision.

“There’sbeen no conversation,” Mr Johnston told The Australian FinancialReview. “Before, during or after, I haven’t spoken to anyone at MinRes.”’

Another-Azure:

Miningbillionaire Gina Rinehart is set to land her first big play in lithium, withAzure Minerals on the cusp of being snapped up for around $1.7 billion.

Theintricate deal has gone ahead after billionaire prospector Mark Creasy gave hisblessing for Chilean giant SQM to shake hands with Mrs Rinehart.

SQMand Mrs Rinehart’s Hancock Prospecting have joined together to lob an all-cash$3.70- a-share scheme of arrangement proposal, which if not successful willtrigger an off-market takeover priced at $3.65 each.

Thelatter option is looking more likely, as under a scheme of arrangement ChrisEllison’s Mineral Resources will have to sell its 13.6 per cent stake for agross profit of around $2.5 million on a $228m investment, which does notinclude transaction or brokerage fees.

TheWest Australian understands the two-pronged deal structure was formulated so ifMinRes blocks the scheme the proposal would shift to an off-market takeover,which would not force MinRes to sell off its holding.

SHIPPING BERTH PORT HEDLAND:

‘Mineral Resources and Gina Rinehart’s HancockProspecting have won the battle for the right to build a new shippingberth at Port Hedland, as Western Australia flags a huge expansion of theworld’s biggest iron ore port that could add more than $20bn to iron ore exportearnings a year.’

Another:

‘Mineral Resources’ infrastructure agreement with RoyHill and Hancock Prospecting could enable the ASX-listed miner todevelop stranded iron-ore resources such as its Marillana project, Macquariesays. “A development of Marillana and the infrastructure agreement presentsupside risk to our base-case earnings and valuation for MIN,” says Macquarie,which doesn’t factor that project into its base case for Mineral Resources atpresent.

Theinfrastructure agreement with Roy Hill and Hancock couldalso lead to lower transport costs for its existing Pilbara iron-ore miningoperations, the bank adds. ([email protected];@RhiannonHoyle)
(END) Dow Jones Newswires’

Another:

HancockProspecting commits to Delta Lithium’s $70 million raise

DeltaLithium (ASXLI) is undertaking a fully underwritten acceleratednon-renounceable entitlement offer on the basis of 2 shares for every 7existing shares to raise about $70.2 million.

Thecompany has entered into an underwriting agreement with Mineral Resources(ASX:MIN) and joint lead managers Bell Potter Securities and Canaccord Genuity(Australia) whereby MinRes has agreed to fully underwrite the offer.

DeltaLithium says MinRes and Hancock Prospecting collectively hold 22% of thecompany’s existing and outstanding shares and have indicated they intend totake up their full entitlement, representing about $15.4 million. All directorsof Delta who are shareholders have indicated they also intend to participate.

Another-Atlas:

‘In addition to typicaltactical, regulatory and administrative issues requiring continualconsideration, a variety of overlapping circumstances created a complexacquisition with a number of complications: an existing friendly takeover byMineral Resources (via Scheme of Arrangement) was on foot at the time, thepresence of a large Term Loan B lender position, a highly fragmented shareregister (many sitting on very substantial losses) and the subsequent emergenceof FMG with a 20% blocking stake and their application to the Takeovers Panel;and a highly visible place in the media given the high profile of the variousparties involved and the stress that Atlas was under.

Atlas was put into play inApril 2018 when Mineral Resources made its $280m bid, followed by FMGannouncing its 19.9% blocking stake in early-mid June and then Hancock’s own19.96% stake and $400m bid shortly thereafter. In this competitive landscapethe Mineral Resources bid was promptly withdrawn, and while FMG didn’t putforward a bid, it did make an application to the Takeovers Panel regarding theHancock offer.

The takeover offer wasunanimously recommended to Atlas Iron shareholders by its board, and Hancockreached a control position of >50% around 6 weeks after launch, before the90% compulsory takeover threshold was achieved around 2 months later on the backof a strategic offer price increase, valuing Atlas at $440m which triggered FMGaccepting the bid.’