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

SLR

Click for more information

0.00%

$1.57 silver lake resources limited

The general and admin costs are ridiculous, I would like to have...

First 8 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Discoveryman

306 Posts.

44

17/11/17

06:33

Post #: 28876172
Share

Originally posted by zog ↑

As I see it SLR have both reasonable resources, a good cash position and a good processing plant at Randalls (possibly need to be able to process more dirt though to increase production). Their big problem is a stubbornly high ASIC and a lousy old style management which not only refuses to publicize the company but also happy to stick with old technology (i.e drilling lot of holes without much thought) and not taking responsibility for bad management in the past.

We now have Brian Kennedy (BK) up for election tomorrow - he was one of those responsible for the Murchison fiasco including the 2012/13 loan which forced emergency CR's leading to all our shares being gutted by dilution. As a start BK needs to explain to SH's why they should vote for his re-election when he was one of those responsible for a SP collapse since 2012/13. An issue he needs to explain are why he (as a board member) he sanctioned 12 month contracts with mining contractors at the Murchison where a simple run of a spreadsheet would have told them that the project was not viable at the then current PoG. In 2012 they bet that the PoG was going to go up from ~US$1300/ozs to about US$2,000/oz and froze us into 12 months contracts at that loss making rate; this turned the Murchison from a disaster to a catastrophe - as one of those responsible BK (and also LD) should have fallen on his sword long ago; but he has no shame and still carries on regardless (collecting their NED fees). The other issue is that the took on a debt of 10/12/2012 from NAB ($75m) which they wasted on the Murchison and then had an emergency CR in 27/8/2013 ($47m) followed by SPP for $15m in Sept 2013 to repay this NAB debt but did not let SH's know the terms of the loan; to me BK and LD share liability for this fiasco . and have to go. This was followed by a CR on 28/2/2014 ($39m) to rescue the company from the resulting losses; how bad can a company be managed? those that remain from this fiasco who are still on the on the board (LD and BK) need to fall on their swords and exit with some respect. Each of the directors on the board made about $11m from selling their "founder' options (4m each) and left the rest of us SH's in the lurch; I would love to see BK voted out tomorrow and the company get a "strike" on their rem report (i.e 25% against) which may (just) focus their attention on SH value as another "strike" next year would mean they all go (that's the law). I think the Chairman (David Quinlivan) means well (he was not part of the old board) but needs a bit of an incentive to get rid of the "good ol'boys" who refuse to take responsibilty for the destruction of SH value.

Today I went to the Northern Star (NST) AGM - what a difference? In 2012/13 these two company's were at about the same level. SLR had Daisy and NST had Paulsens - look at where they are now - the difference is good management. NST avoided the disastrous mistakes of SLR's "good ol'boys"; those remaining (LD and BK) need to fall on their sword before SLR can recover - they have made a mint why don't they just go!!

Finally NST was talking about how they proved up new resources (and reserves) by using 3D seismics - acorring to Bill Beament the prospects showed up like "a sore thumb" - they just had to go along an drill them; why don't SLR use these techniques before drilling holes all over the place. SLR needs to demonstrate that it is using technology to get the best bang for the buck - the difference is demonstrated by the targetted success of NST's exploration compared to SLR's - their ground is just a prospective. The other difference is in driving down the AISC by using technology to reduce costs and also the HR techniques they use to incentivize their work forces - it's all down to management; the difference is chalk and cheese.

Expand

The general and admin costs are ridiculous, I would like to have that cost audited to ascertain how the money is being spent, I would encourage an audit to determine if senior executive are utilising their corporate expenses appropriately.

I would love to be able to examine the Corporate accounts to see how much each Director spends on mobile phones / flights / hotels / entertainment / taxis etc.

I would be very confident that shareholders would be alarmed at how their money is spent

The recent NED salary increase by 36% is nothing short of a greedy money grab with no benefit to the shareholder.

I believe in rewarding performance but what have they achieved? It is not acceptable to compare yourself to a group of other companies who are performing and then say what about me. I have looked at NED salaries for some of the other companies they refer to when using a comparison and cant see the justification.

SLR Price at posting: 36.5¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
11 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply

Top Stories

PTR

Petratherm adds $1.6 to the piggybank ahead of SA titanium drilling program

SNG

Siren Gold boosts antimony resource by 66% to 14.5Kt at Auld Creek, NZ

WMG

Western Mines identifies 2 high-grade zones at Mulga Tank in WA

WR1

Winsome scoping study proposes low-cost operation for Adina lithium project

ALR

Altair Minerals hits high-grade copper and gold at Wee MacGregor, QLD

There are more pages in this discussion • 5 more messages in this thread...

First 8 Last

Add SLR (ASX) to my watchlist