Keep calm, we will be back on track.

Someone clearly decided to do the equivalent of jumping from a 100 foot building last night and landed on concrete. I hope it wasn't my post that gave a few holders the chills but want to clarify something as maybe I came across too bearish. I simply want to see this company run to the highest standards possible.

Whilst I raised concerns yesterday, I think people are forgetting that we have a valuable asset in the form of Chatree and any arbitration award that could be handed down. We are blessed with two of the most claimant friendly arbitrators in the game - Neil Kaplan and Laurent Levy. On a sunk costs basis alone, we are going to be due a minimum of USD 350-450m. We invested USD 150m in a brand new processing plant not long before our assets were expropriated. This doesn't consider the gross ca AUD 1bn of CAPEX that has gone into the mine over time or any damages due taking into account lost profits. Tribunals are generally reluctant to offer lost profits damages when an asset is greenfield, but our baby produces gold and cash flow. Valuation is an art not a science, but we are on the right side on the equation here. See: http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2019/07/03/future-profits-vs-cost-when-do-tribunals-consider-a-damages-claim-too-speculative/

I have received some inbound enquiry on how we would enforce such an award... well the truth is these days you don't need to. When one holds an arbitration award or legal asset against a defendant with the ability to pay (but perhaps not the willingness), there are insurance products available to guarantee a minimum level of pay-out.

https://www.financierworldwide.com/contingent-risk-insurance#.YOTykuhKhPY
https://www.aon.com/m-and-a-transaction/transactionsolutions/litigationsolutions.jsp

The blue sky scenario is still a restart of Chatree with a subsequent sale - this entails risks and may require other personnel to put things on the right track, but you all need to keep things in perspective.

Another point I would like to add is on the wait for an arbitration award. Please consider that emerging markets sovereigns and/or dictatorial states such as Thailand are ran from the top down with many politicians constantly on tender hooks when managing and legislating with contentious issues. Usually ministers in these states need to be walked down the plank to sign off and take ownership of decisions they otherwise wouldn't want to make. The risk of jail and being used as a political pawn are all risk.

Putting this in context, we are requesting permits from a number of different ministries. Its red tape and will simply take time to wrap this all up - there is nothing more to it. We have Thailand on the arbitration, handily.

We have to invest with our eyes wide open - for a number of different reasons - but I am sure this story will be put back on the right track. It is important to ask the difficult questions to management and push them to their limits, but don't whine like a pack of hyenas whilst you sit in mum's basement in your mustard stained jocks.

Its one thing to be critical - but have some substance. Cactusjack and Adam A are clearly two bag holders that owned the company a few dollars a share north from here and now revel in the schadenfreude experience whenever the share price drops a penny. If you are so unhappy with things, get up off your arses and take action, as me and other shareholders are doing.

Ciao.