Reconstruction, page-110

Hi @Jaded

Addressing some of the points in your comment.


TON will be affected in almost every scenario
Just not being liquidated does not mean TON will come out unscathed. I gave other examples, and in all of them TON will be badly affected.

Liquidation – needless to say it is game over
Sale of Nicanda - amputation of one hand to save life of body
Sale of Ancuabe- amputation of one hand to save life of body
Dilution at 2c for eg. – Will take an eternity for old shareholders to get back money and only new ones might gain
UK listing and / or ASX delisting – ASX shareholders might never get a fair price, as games continue.

A 3 or 4 million placement might get us out of admin and you are right. But it is hard for me to personally support such a placement as I doubt that any white knights supporting the placement are actually white knights rather than dark knights who directly or indirectly knew what was going to follow. Of course, they will be portrayed as white knights.
Another issue is that there is TON will still need more cash eventually and what then – another dilution?

Sacking of BB

I know enough of Boardroom dynamics and role of Chairman to know that he would not have taken this decision himself. Once more, refer to past 2 days comments by Jack and me, where it is clearly explained using the words of your friend, the former top 20 shareholder himself who admitted his role. Hard to have a reasonable debate if you are repeatedly going to defend the indefensible and twist words to give alternate meanings.

Where did the rock come from
You raise a valid point. If you say this should be investigated, then I agree. But we did not go into admin because of that; so don't make it look like admin was because of this. Admin was purely because of cash, and there seemed to be plenty of avenues to avoid admin recently, and most importantly, just get the raising fully underwritten.

Independent geo analysis
We already have external consultant signed off JORC. So I can’t personally see how this is so critical when we are bankrupt which is obviously the bigger priority. We did not go into admin because of missing holes, or whatever but shortage of cash. That is all there is to it, and cash should have been the top priority. I’ve given plenty of examples in last few weeks of where cash went wrong in recent times. You are ignoring all those comments.

Sale of Nicanda

You have mentioned couple of times in recent times that Nicanda should be sold. So, I’m seeing your comment calling Nicanda a dog in conjunction with those statements.
I’ve already mentioned how TON has already failed if it sells Nicanda.

As @staz024 replies to you – “ It is a bit silly Jaded to suggest that Nicanda Hill sans Nicanda West, is somehow worthless as it is very similar to what SYR have. Different deposit but much the same.”
http://hotcopper.com.au/threads/reconstruction.2721157/page-90?post_id=17261657

One company has turned a similar deposit into a billion dollar company. Selling it is a complete failure on part of TON. Note again that we have landed in this fix again only due to cash mismanagement.

Top 20
Once more, you are ignoring my words on top 20 by suggesting that I want a top 20 now. Hard to have a debate this way when words are being twisted and / or ignored (no alternate literature here ).

Explained this point numerous times. As @ckchristian told you clearly here, there is a broader issue of transparency with everything. For me, the top 20 hiding was the first sign of lack of transparency
http://hotcopper.com.au/threads/reconstruction.2721157/page-93?post_id=17262201

Hi @jamesph61 –
Your point has some merit. I was actually going to tell you recently that maybe you were partially right. I did not want to get too generous with complimenting you though.

So here is the deal though- If you are going to raise that point, then raise the number of times I actually raised the actual issues too like cash management too, or else you are being selective.

Again, even in my new comments, I have no comments about management but about decisions made. Whether Catlow / Higgo made them or whether others pressurized them…I don’t know. So, I’m not even criticizing them now, and have no issue with them at all. That is just my style….sorry. I don’t intend on changing that. I have however in recent times focused just on the decisions and how decisions were wrong, and going forward, I'm going to try to solely focus on decisions. No issues with top 20 but with the hiding of the top 20. No issues with management but with the decisions whether they were their own or forced upon them. Hope that makes sense.

No, I did not bag and belittle anyone in the past. In all cases, if a non holder (like you) attempted to bag and belittle me, then you should obviously expect something back. You’ll find 99% of my comments to non holders only as replies addressing something they say. Certain exceptions where you tried to dox @PD1 recently which IMO was just plain wrong.

So anyway, like I was saying you are partially right and I fully agree that I could have been wrong about management. I do however feel that we are at extremes – you are too harsh on management and I’m probably too soft. I don’t think either approach is the appropriate one for shareholders.

I do admit that you might be far more right about shareholders being tough with management here, though. Yes, far more right with me – not disputing the obvious.

There was no fan club and TON brigade etc. I’ve raised more valid issues than even non holders. So not going to prove that.

Lastly on the topic of non holders, I hope you take this the right way. As you can see above, if you raise a genuine point, I will acknowledge it, even if it means saying I was wrong. It is hard for me personally to take seriously the comments of someone who only posts on 1 stock and all negative comments. I’m assuming many others would have that issue. So it becomes like the case of the boy who cried wolf, and even if genuine issues are raised, not many will consider it, unless there is some balance. Even though you call me part of fan club, etc. etc. surely you’d know all the issues I’ve raised. If you genuinely want me or many others to take your comments seriously, then aim for that balance. Hope you take this the right way as I’ve clearly acknowledged that you might have been right here. I’m still not entirely sure if this approach works for all companies, though.