Hi, I will also be voting no. I hold about 0.1% of total shares. The approach is way too passive for my liking. It's almost like a quasi receivership and one that doesn't inspire confidence or high remuneration.
I don't mind debt being paid down but there needs to be some vision adjacent to this that will ensure AGO prospers and delivers significant return to shareholders in the foreseeable future.
No mention of lump in that video interview was very disappointing. How About discussing a change in weighting of product mix to maximise returns for shareholders and the structrual reform happening in China with lower emissions ensuring AGO can be a beneficiary of this with its product not requiring sintering.
Also there has been no real reduction in costs at all. No renegotiation with contractors about break even rates, no transport cost savings (can we consolidate more ore and have less runs), any discussions with govt or majors about using rail, unlocking asset in port by maybe allowing majors to use in return for a royalty, lithium jvs and potential savings for pls and ago in sharing resources. What about new iron ore projects with emphasis on lump? The CD agreement was a disgrace and handed over millions of shares and increase debt for nothing. Apparently not all the approvals are in place anyway
So much potential but nothing to show for it
AGO Price at posting:
1.7¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
