Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

AVQ

Click for more information

0.00%

2.5¢ axiom mining limited

Shareholder Information Session, page-5

First 5 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
sirjohnnyboy

2,599 Posts.

1713

01/06/16

14:14

Post #: 17924060
Share

Originally posted by mineordietrying ↑

All,

This is the first and most likely last time I will be posting here. I attended one of the information sessions this week and got the chance to meet RM who I had never met and talked to before. Before everybody starts judging my opinions below, I must say that this is purely my own opinions and those are not judging people as individuals but as business operators/shareholders/owners.

Following one of the sessions I must admit that I was less than convinced by RM arguments in terms of future plans for the company. No set plans for financing, no set plans in the short term while awaiting information about formally applying for the lease and no set plans to reduce expenditure and maximize cash flow.

Yes, a lot was said about how he thought that we would be mining within the year and hopefully sooner than later (his words). “Hopefully” should never ever be used in the business world. A fine business man should know that. He also mentioned that 2-3 months post approval should be needed to start mining. We all know how giving timeframes to shareholders should be carefully done. His track record for such thing is average to poor.

In regards to the exploration of San Jorge and justifying slow progress there (and elsewhere as a matter of fact), he used excuses of how everything is difficult in the Solomon Islands from having to push tracks in, clear pads, Community Affairs, little existing infrastructure, etc. Well, all those things are incredibly standard in terms of mining in third world countries. This is experienced by every single mining project in the world at exploration and project development phases. Using this to justify the current situation is simply a poor excuse and is a reflection of current management. Many mining projects have successfully transitioned from exploration to operation in similar countries such as PNG, Fiji, New Caledonia, etc. Axiom is not facing problems that have not been faced in the past by others despite what is being said.
Yet, the General Managers of such successful operations are not paid $700K a year. Question of RM salary was raised today as well as his intention of taking a pay cut. Answers were that he had thought about it but nothing had been finalized which to me means that it will not happen. Cash flow is tight and his huge salary is simply a waste of cash for the company and could be/could have been invested in much better ways. RM tried to justify his salary by saying that no executives were willing to relocate to the Solomon Island, that the place had Zika, Dengue and Malaria and that the taxation was very high. Well, most mining countries have parasite infected mosquitoes, tax in Solomon Island is higher than Australia, yes, but even if it was as high as 50% he would still clear $350K a year which would allow him to live more than comfortably in a country where everything is cheap. But, more importantly, he chose to go there and his partner is a local of the Solomon Islands. That was a "tough” choice indeed.

People will take his defense and say that no one could have seen that court case coming. Well, that is not correct, RM admitted that during the application process in 2010 (excuse me if the date is wrong) that a few steps were not correctly undertaken by the government (2 or 3 out of 15 - RM words). Any other company would have been on top of this kind of paperwork as this is the most important legal document that a mining company can have. This is called due diligence. To me, this whole process has been poorly managed by Axiom and RM.
On the same topic, it is interesting comparing companies market capitalization vs their CEO salaries. For instance: If Sam Walsh (Rio Tinto CEO) was the AVQ CEO but were to apply his current Rio Tinto market cap/salary ratio to the AVQ market cap, he would then only get paid $10,000 a year managing AVQ. Similarly, If RM was the Rio Tinto CEO but were to apply his current AVQ market cap/salary ratio to the Rio Tinto market cap, he would then get paid around 750 million a year managing Rio. Isn’t that telling you that someone is being paid way too much for the company he is managing? Mind you, one is highly educated, highly experienced and the manager of a company that generates billions in revenue and the other one is… nothing (yet?). RM has delivered very little to show for sadly.

Before everyone starts criticizing me and that I am simply a very bitter investor that lost money, well that is also incorrect as I am just even at the moment. I think people need to realize that RM is not unreplaceable… His track record is so far average to poor at the most. JORC is good to have but Axiom messed up the mining lease application process, they didn’t play their cards smartly and are burning cash faster than ever seen. How can one justify being paid that much when absolutely nothing is happening?

Things and people need to chance or the company will go bankrupt.
This is my modest opinion of someone that has seen many projects develop and overcome those exact same issues.
Regards,

Expand

Mate ...I don't want to vilify you or your point of view ...would be nice to keep opinions open and I hope you continue to post.

My thoughts on RM's salary are well known and I was one of only two people who raised the issue in Bris which is where you must have attended. Just as we were being open and straightforward with ...he was also being open with us -and essentially he was saying that no executives want to live in SI and providing reasons why this was the case. If I was him (at this point in time) I would take a significant amount of salary in shares and that way most shareholders would be happy -he would definitely be seen as a company saviour. I agree with you about the cash-flow issue and I was actually the one who raised that point. I've made that point ad-nauseam.

Also, couple of points of order (no offence intended -just read these things differently):

1. RM's reference to the difficulties in SJ was not because he doesn't like mosquitoes or being without internet ...but rather because of the cost involved to the company and whether that was the most logical use of funds for the company at this point in time.

2. The reluctance regarding raising funds / financing was because of the current shareprice and dilution concerns. Doesn't want to raise funds till we have the good news we are anticipating (I fully agree).

3. It's not appropriate to go back to decisions and processes that were not followed perfectly in 2010 BY THE GOVERNMENT and blame AVQ management. What company is going to front the gov and say "we notice that you didn't follow the correct process (by allowing 30 days review for example) so we don't want that mining license ...but thanks anyway"? Particularly when that was typical of the SIG modus-operandi / practice at the time and reflective of their minimal resources & possible lack of expertise.

I don't disagree with everything you say, but I also cant see the point in not being constructive towards the company in general at this point. Also don't want to sell out now, crystallizing losses and losing the potential upside after the anticipated future anns that I strongly believe will come soon.

Cheers,

SJB

AVQ Price at posting: 15.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
8 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply

Top Stories

STK

5.6g/t gold intercept at Serbia's Rogozna supports Strickland's hopes for high-grade core

NAM

ACCC seeks Olam divestments before its acquisition of Namoi Cotton can go ahead

ESR

Estrella first foreign entity to win tenements in Timor-Leste under new laws ahead of 2025 tenders

ACW

Actinogen Medical ramps up Alzheimer’s treatment trials, targeting fast-track global approvals

4DX

4DMedical lands Philips US reseller deal with eye to Veterans Affairs' market post-lung damage

ZER

Zeta Resources seeks to resolve the Panoramic takeover story

COD

Coda Minerals (ASX:COD) enters rights issue to further exploration in South Australia

The winners & losers on market if negative gearing were gone

The market's shrugged at China's stimulus measures all year. Why is this one different?

DEG

HotCopper users muse on De Grey's denial of Agnico Eagle takeover bid – but who are Agnico?

There are more pages in this discussion • 38 more messages in this thread...

First 5 Last

Add AVQ (ASX) to my watchlist