Yes, quite agree Timon. As a shareholder in both companies, I...

Yes, quite agree Timon. As a shareholder in both companies, I believe that a merged single entity would be much stronger and more profitable than running the two companies separately. Overheads and administration would be simpler and much less expensive, and the complications and costs of the JVs would be eliminated. Raising finance should be easier and cheaper, and a merged shareholder register should provide greater liquidity and be a positive for the share price.

I'm hoping that behind the scenes merger talks might already be underway, but I have no information to suggest that is happening.

Negotiating the terms of a merger might require a bit of give and take on both sides, but I believe that the end result of an equitable marriage would significantly benefit both companies. In the meantime, some spectacular assays on either side would change the dynamics of the deal, and NAG might benefit from delaying a decision until their assay results come through (although I think that both sides will have a pretty good idea of what those results are going to be).

Mike