It could get messy and drawn out doing it that way. IF we were to go it alone the best way and safest is to raise via placement and underwritten rights issue. Lets say we need 30 million Au. You could probably do a 50/50 split 15 million placement and 15 million in rights that any shortfall on take up are underwritten by the placement insto. Its cleaner and guarantees the cash.
I'm not sure by what metric you think the deal is a stinker? Does anyone here actually believe Scott chose the worst deal for a farm in? Its pretty clear that this was the best deal, taking in to consideration the long term future of IVZ, that was on the table. Now that could be for a number of reasons. Maybe Scott and co haven't done a good enough job selling the farm in, initially ENVOI were doing it....not sure where they went?? Maybe companies are wary of Zimbabwe, maybe they want the PSA signed before committing. Fact is though this deal, which has raised the ire of a few is absolutely non binding. I find it mildly amusing that when a non binding MOU is announced by other companies its wiped off as meaningless yet when IVZ do one its set in concrete. It certainly isn't set in stone and it may be the best offer we get. I suspect if it is we will go it alone as Scott will be diluted more than anyone here by a country mile by the Cluff deal.
IVZ Price at posting:
12.5¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)