GBR shareprice has collapsed from mid 20s to 7.5 cents in less than a year.
The executive team has made numerous claims in presentations that GBR is the best value low tier gold discoverer on the ASX. How can they make such claims without knowing the other companies? Why would those kind of claims be being made?
It is well known that's a rising share price and capital raise at that higher price results in less market cap. What executives say about their company can lead to run away share price valuations not backed up by fundamentals. Take getswift as an example.
Has GBR management been over claiming their stated best value tier 1 explorer on the ASX?
Yes I think so. Why?
The share price has slumped from mid 20s to 7s. A drop of 60-70%.
There is a shift in messaging from GBR Mgmt now. One from mulga bill is the priority and gold is the focus now to Wellington and Lead/tin could be the way to build shareholder growth citing other companies in the same region that are no comparison (since they have proven MREs) of doubling market cap.
Why is mgmt here clutching at what would seem to be straws. Is it a desperate attempt to prop up share price? I think so.
Having analysed many gold discoverers I have to say I don't see shift in focus like this when the gold is discovered. It is my unfortunate view that the gold is not there with Mulga.
Should AP have to walk back his statement of a 6km strike length? Yes. Based on current evidence he can no longer say that. The 450 m anomoly south found no sizable gold. In this latest announcement he has now admitted to that, but has failed to then tell investors what that means to previous claims of 6 km strike length.
if the geologists now reasonably suspect or believe we no longer have a 6 km strike length legally they are obliged to report on that.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
