Kalahari Minerals Share Discussion Threads

[qackers] 15/5/2011 00:34

By: Matthew Hill
13th May 2011

TORONTO (miningweekly.com) – Uranium One CEO Chris Sattler expects to see India emerge as a buyer of uranium companies around the world, increasing competition for a limited number of assets, he said in an interview this week.

Bloomberg reported on Friday the country is talking to Kazakhstan, Niger and Namibia about buying mines in those countries, citing chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission Srikumar Banerjee.

full article

[nielsc] 12/5/2011 14:20

Looks like the Uranium price has stabilised now.



Cheers,
Niels

[kimball808] 12/5/2011 06:48

Extract up 1.6% so far...

[brad44] 11/5/2011 20:22

Hi gn. they surely could at that price!!

[gnevans] 11/5/2011 20:17

no one wants to compete with the chinse it seems..

[cootuk] 11/5/2011 17:06

Perhaps we might see an offtake agreement if the chinese are unwilling to buy in fully.
Guaranteed sales would help underpin the expansion for raising finance.

[krakow] 11/5/2011 16:34

Much as I disagree with it as a strategy I now believe we'd be better off building and operating a mine and don't let the Chinese or anyone else have it at all if they're going to try and steal it.

[krakow] 11/5/2011 16:29

...unless they are going to come back and pay something realistic like 400p - 600p.

270p is pathetic.

[red ninja] 11/5/2011 16:18

Zangdook,

Totally aggree KAH is no charity, let's have our dosh...

[zangdook] 11/5/2011 16:14

There is also no point in taking the break fee because as far as they are concerned the offer is effectively still there.

What do you mean there's no point? They owe us money. If they want to come back and make another offer later, then they may want to deduct the break fee from the amount they're willing to pay, but for now they should pay it.

Don't forget there was a break fee the other way too. KAH have given commitments, broken off other discussions and been put to expense. If KAH had suddenly demanded 310p and backed out when it wasn't forthcoming, would CGNPC have waived our break fee? Why was the break fee even written into the agreement?

[beefeater25] 11/5/2011 16:03

Exactly, actions like that and conversations behind closed doors could suggest this was far from over... definitely dont think we will have to wait 3 months for the next bid.

What would stop CGNPC from pulling out of bidding direct for KAH and instead of waiting 3 months, putting a bid in next week of ASD10 for EXT (approx 2.70p per KAH share)??? Does anyone think it would be in KAHs interest to suggest such a deal?

Thoughts?

[zangdook] 11/5/2011 15:29

In effect we're giving CGNPC an interest-free loan of £7.5m, and quite possibly it will turn into a gift. Are there any other companies out there we want to be on the right side of? Hohnen was whining about RIO in the AGM statement - why not try giving RIO £7.5m; they might be more amenable to allowing KAH to raise capital then.

Which leads me to wonder, doesn't waiving the £7.5m come under UK anti-bribery legislation?

[bene449] 11/5/2011 12:51

Share price very strong despite the bid collapsing. Obviously, there is more happening in the background and this is causing the share price strength. Just bought another 3000.

[kimball808] 11/5/2011 12:05

weird, so far Mr market, he say yah...

[rbf] 11/5/2011 12:04

Pretty shambolic......UNLESS there are things going on in the background.
Only time will tell!

[zangdook] 11/5/2011 11:59

"... it is imperative that Kalahari remains unrestricted to
maintain and, wherever possible, increases its current 42.79% interest in
Extract, as it delivers on the various capital requirements of developing Husab
towards production. We are therefore disappointed that Rio Tinto, which holds
an 11.5% interest in the Company, again voted against the resolution to
increase the Company's headroom to allot additional shares. This is the third
attempt by Rio Tinto to limit or disallow our ability to exercise our right to
maintain or increase our interest in Extract; an action which we believe would
directly affect our powers to accrue value for our shareholders.


But if we demand the £7.5m, won't that help us maintain or increase our stake in EXT? What's the idea - that if we demand what we're entitled to, to make up for the disruption to our business, the Chinese will get in a huff and refuse to buy Husab uranium for their power stations when it's eventually being produced?

Gimme a break, Mr Hohnen. Even if this made sense, Kalahari won't exist as a separate company at that time.

[thorpematt] 11/5/2011 11:54

The whole thing was overly complex in the first place. Now things are even more confused.

Personally I reckon KAH is holding most of the cards (i.e. it owns the resource that others need). I never understood WHY 290p was accepted in the first place. I'd much rather hold this long -term and realise greater upside.

Now it is clear that CGNPC want a bargain. I suspect this is more to do with the greater scheme (i.e China has a vested interest in not looking too keen/ desparate for commodoties) rather than it being the belief that KAH isn't worth £3 and beyond. I'd do the same in their shoes.

Normally an event like today's would have seen a bigger drop fired by short-selling on the "bad news", but TBH CGNPC can go away for good for all I care.
I suspect most holders feel the same.

The Japan tsunami was a tragic catatstrophe for many, for us it was unfortunate in both scale and timing. But the fact is 270p is way too low on the grander scheme. Uranium is in urgent short-fall and things aren't getting better any time soon.