As the ex-CEO / Executive Director of Cohiba I felt it would be appropriate to write a few comments.
I will not address some of the borderline libellous commentary as I understand that share trading can be an emotional roller coaster for many people and they often look for someone to blame. But I do advocate that those comments be kept to oneself as we all have to make a living and these false statements can be very damaging to a person's reputation and ability to gain ongoing work.
I want to clarify a few things that I trust will help settle some people.
1. Commentary around "lifestyle" executives are not helpful nor true. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. The past 4 years was a hard gig. I was not salaried as many assumed. I was contracted through my own consultancy firm to deliver the CEO's role to Cohiba (their preference). I was not paid leave, superannuation, no benefits, no travel, no conferences, no on-costs. I paid for my own office and office support staff, all my own equipment and consumables. I took no time off from the role in the 4 years I was there. I did the role of CEO, Executive Director, geologist, tenement manager and completed on average 70 statutory reports per annum (76 in calendar year 2023 - yes! 1.5 reports per week!). I also managed a major dispute with a drilling company which saw me generate 968 pages of affidavits in a single year. If this is what people deem as "lifestyle" you have a lot to learn.
2. My resignation was not a response to any dire issue with the company - quite the opposite. The new majority investors wanted to put their own team in place (fully understandable) and whilst I could only be voted off by the SH's it was amicably agreed that I would resign and allow the transition to occur seamlessly for the sake of all stakeholders. This came with NO "handshake" as I was under contract so the obligation was a 2-month handover (which ends May 17th) and nothing else.
3. When I came on board 4 years ago the share price was at $0.003 and with the help of the team we were able to see that rise to $0.057. Unfortunately, a major sell off saw a lot of this gain disappear quickly of which I was very aware given the vitriolic backlash and the 2 death threats to myself and my wife and kids that required an investigation. One SH claimed that his loss meant he couldn't provide for underprivileged kids overseas and their "blood was on my hands and God would judge me eternally" - anyone like to receive that on email and via phone? Please be aware that there are real people with real emotions at the end of these comments / calls / emails etc.
4. One of the longest threads "Duster after Duster" causes me a lot of consternation. IOCG deposits are some of the most complex orebodies in existence and in the Gawler Craton they are deep but the upside is they can be potentially huge. I do not in any way believe that CHK has missed the mark nor do I believe that these are dusters. I also completely reject the comment that CHK did not do its homework. CHK meticulously planned every drill hole being fully aware of what each hole costs. CHK drilled virgin ground based on extensive gravity, magnetic and magnetotelluric interpretations and was able to intersect persistent low-grade mineralisation (a huge upside when looking for a mineralised system), identify new major dilational structures (critical for fluid movement) and identify petrology, mineralogy, alteration styles, indicator elements and brecciation styles which were all highly indicative of proximal locations to a an IOCG system. The technical analysis and reports delivered by CHK to its stakeholders were, I believe, some of the most comprehensive and well considered reports on IOCG systems delivered by any junior explorer. My only regret is that I would have loved to have drilled 2-3 more holes before my departure. When you consider that the Gawler Craton is 440,000 sq km you are truly looking for a needle in a haystack and to be able to deliver highly encouraging (in my technical opinion) initial results in largely untapped ground should be reason for optimism not cries of "duster" - which does not, in any way, truly reflect what has been unearthed to date.
5. Many of the delays (assay results being one of them) that are encountered are well and truly outside of the control of CHK (be good to remember that with the new team as they will face the same challenges and need SH support). Commercial labs have been overrun for years and as such you have no choice but to wait - CHK moved samples to different labs on occasion but it did not make any difference. In Canada the lithium boom is so huge that the problem has just been magnified even further. Other delays pertaining to exploration activities can not be well understood until you are in the midst of it - Native Title, Heritage Surveys, Anthropological Studies, E-PEPR documents (sometime over 150 pages), Access Agreements, Entry Notifications, legislative / statutory hurdles - and more, just to get a rig on the ground and if one of these components falls over the delays can be weeks to months. Coordinating all of this is a huge and often frustrating undertaking (but it is what we do).
6. SH Support - running a publicly listed company is not easy and I truly believe that the overwhelming majority of Directors want to do the right thing by the SH. Commentary around "lifestyle executives" may apply in a very small number of cases but on the whole it fails to recognise the work load and the stress associated with trying to balance expectations from SH's, Government agencies, multiple Aboriginal groups, environmentalists, landowners, station owners, contractors, suppliers and lobbyists. The BOD appreciates SH support more than you may know and feels the sting when the opposite is delivered.
I think that I have said enough.
Please support your BOD - they are working on your behalf.
Regards
Andrew Graham
Expand
