Ariana Resources Share Discussion Threads

[soulsauce] 10/2/2021 15:38

Cheers Plasybryn. I will take some convincing but will try and keep an open mind.

[lottsgold] 10/2/2021 15:22

Well done Plas appreciate the extra effort.

[plasybryn] 10/2/2021 14:59

There has been quite a bit of debate on this B.B. regarding Resolution 3 that will allow the Directors authority to buy back up to 5% of the issued ordinary shares into Treasury.
I have managed to speak with Yellow Jersey this afternoon concerning this and we talked through the valid points that have been raised. They are aware of this discussion and have kindly confirmed that the company will clarify this for all shareholders, probably later this week. So please watch this space

[thanksamillion] 10/2/2021 14:30

Great minds..etc.

[thanksamillion] 10/2/2021 14:29

20m shares is less than 3% so probably never declarable.

[paul280i] 10/2/2021 14:28

Kirbs, 20 million is less than 3% so he would not have had to declare his holding.

[kirbs4] 10/2/2021 13:40

Biggles wouldn't there have had to be an rns if his holding had gone below 3m? Or are there different rules when it comes to settling of an estate?

[huffster] 10/2/2021 13:38

and all those shares seemed to have gone / are going to retail buyers ergo there is no institutional appetite for AAU...

[bigglesbingham] 10/2/2021 12:51

Bruce rowen owned 20m AAU and I mentioned some time back that I suspected it could be his estate selling ie not related to the potential of company but beneficiaries wanting money thus creating buying opportunity.

[xow98] 10/2/2021 11:38

8rad, if pre-emption rights have been dis-applied via resolution there is nothing we could do about it for the relevant period until the next vote on it.

This was Resolution 6 of the last AGM which gave the directors the authority to issue up to £500k to anybody for 15 months from date of AGM (i.e. to Nov 2021) and passed by a majority of 219m votes.

[huffster] 10/2/2021 10:45

Starvest updated today with following: "The Company disposed of its full holdings in Marechale Capital and Salt Lake Potash during the year, along with a portion of its positions in Oracle Power and Ariana Resources."

They used to appear on our list of significant shareholders, along with Bruce Rowan andEuropean Goldfields but they have all dropped off / below 3% as far as I can see. Not a single Institutional Holder with 3% on there now.



*edit I do realise that Bruce Rowan sadly died recently

[8rad] 10/2/2021 09:30

I think the Board know now that we are watching you.... too many people here know too much for option ankypanky.

[soulsauce] 10/2/2021 09:23

xow98 great post.

[uknighted] 10/2/2021 08:32

Lots Freetrade, I’ve read of users dissatisfaction. Slow to trade, not very competitive bid/offers. I hasten to add, no experience myself, you pays your money and makes your choice.

[xow98] 10/2/2021 08:10

I think the funds would be better utilized by being invested in and accelerating exploration / development of current / future prospects. The only buybacks I see as necessary are for the Turkish employees, if there are still such shareholders.

I fear the bulk of the buyback shares will be used for management share options which I would oppose on the grounds of past behaviour. If they stated the shares were to be cancelled I might consider it.

As a further comment, I think we should vote against any future resolution disapplying pre-emption rights to protect ourselves from any future fundraising and dilution. We have sufficient funds at the moment for the forseeable future and could raise debt for any capital works should we need to develop.

As Paul Scott of Stockopedia comented: "I feel it is wrong for companies to routinely disapply pre-emption rights. It's a core principle of company law that existing shareholders should be allowed to protect their % shareholding in any fundraisings, with an automatic right to buy new shares pro rata to existing holdings. I think it's wrong that this principle is so routinely waived by companies. What we need is a modernised system, to allow fundraisings to be done much more quickly, cheaply, and electronically."

[kaos3] 10/2/2021 07:23

each exceptional manager used the tool of the buy back to add value. I like it a lot if used wisely.

there is huge number of shares that are floating around, that are undervalued and can be bought back (it is paper mining - creating value and ounces to the company at no risk !!! compared to exploration)

shares are either retired or used as a currency ( if above value)

that is the theory lol

and there is a hope too

[lottsgold] 10/2/2021 07:14

Scrub that it's not free for Aim stocks which is my hunting ground. Still only 9.99 a month though. Back to AAU, gold needs a little nudge to get going hopefully another blue day for us.

[lottsgold] 10/2/2021 07:09

Has anyone used the Freetrade app, looks ok, no trade fees, feels like there's a catch?

[bigglesbingham] 10/2/2021 03:34

Due to timescale of required monies think they had little choice . As to whether that position could have been planned for is another matter but to me everyone makes mistakes historically it's whether you listen and learn from them. Soul has always had a bee in bonnet about cheap raises at 20% discount. I bought 2m at 1.3p in one of the raises because I told broker I wanted to be involved. However what always happened was the share price went lower than the share raise price allowing everyone else to participate. My view was the fundamentals and prospects are good so I would add. I've been adding on this principle for seven years and the fundamentals have got stronger and research including mine visit had not done anything but enhance that view. Recently there's been a seller and question re communication . Board listened and issued circular. I believe seller must be nearly gone so I'm very confident moving forward.

[bigglesbingham] 10/2/2021 03:25

Hi Soul one things for certain and that's the fact that we are in an excellent position moving forward and we are undervalued in relation to peers. What has come out over the years was the fact that AAU did need the cash to put their share into JV when the delays due to permitting were created. Proccea actually helped out more during this time because if you remember Proccea had to receive their loans before we took part in profits. The raises gave the money needed to maintain the JV and relationship to be in situation we are in now. It's also known money was hard to come by for small miners 4-5 years ago. As to buy back I am undecided and need more information. I'm sure with KS track record he can put it to better use but need to know more. Beaufort were used cos they did have track record of raising cash quickly. Point is let's look forward and get positive thoughts about a positive position we now find the companies

[charles clore] 10/2/2021 01:57

Soul - I don't think they had much choice apart from perhaps a rights issue but stand to be corrected of course

[soulsauce] 09/2/2021 23:28

No choice really? We'll have to disagree on that one Charles.

[charles clore] 09/2/2021 23:23

Oh dear. I don't suppose the company could be simply putting as much into the treasure chest as possible to provide maximum available options? Does it matter about the company's past when they had no choice but to use the bucket shops to raise cash for survival? Those days are gone and we should now be looking to a bright new future

[dixi] 09/2/2021 22:28

Tend to agree with this Soulsauce. I had even pondered on the amount of AAU that is being sold that is then converted into a tax bill arising from the deal. It's a costly process in some respects.

[soulsauce] 09/2/2021 20:51

We none of us know bigglesbingham. I guess it's something else they haven't communicated well. But until they do I will be voting against it.
If part of the plan was to use cash to buyback shares I would sooner them have kept more of RR.
Again it is a nonsense to cause shareholders so much pain in order to get RR up and running for them to give a large part of it away and then use that cash to buy back shares. It makes no sense.
One of the reasons I was all for the JV is that the chunk of money we were getting was going to be put towards other projects and not frittered away buying back shares that with more care at the time should not have been in issue.