Serabi Gold Share Discussion Threads

[borisjohnsonshair] 30/9/2021 07:54

Production alone suggests MCAP of US$125M.

[bad gateway] 30/9/2021 07:50

CFO interview.

[kennyp52] 30/9/2021 07:37

For interims

In brief .. production needs to be increased and AISC dragged back down thereby . Decent cash generation and balances . Exploration and mine development must now be carefully managed and efficient … is MH in Brazil to oversee ?

[bad gateway] 30/9/2021 07:36

Agreed, nice no.s. Earnings per share of 6.7p for the half year make the share price look a little sad though.

[sleveen] 30/9/2021 07:21

A good set of results.

So long as POG remains @ current levels SRB should do well (and other gold miners too)

[imastu pidgitaswell] 30/9/2021 07:06

And they managed it - bonuses all round...

[imastu pidgitaswell] 30/9/2021 06:52

A conspiracy theory too far (you have spent too much time listening to Prat) - think of the collusion required from Deloitte, their auditor and other authorities there.

It would be far simpler to simply sell some gold and take the overly generous bonuses wouldn't it? Yes, it would.

Results due...

[trader465] 29/9/2021 22:40

What better way to extract untraceable money out of a company other than alleged stolen cash withdrawals? Cash is untraceable, and as we see it’s easy to use undisclosed names and positions of alleged Brazilian personnel as scapegoats for cash withdrawals/misappropriations. Hmm, I smell a rat or two at director level. Snouts are in the trough perhaps?

Maybe that’s the reason for a deliberate blind eye to be turned in the previous accounting periods?

Or perhaps the CFO is simply an incompetent fool?

Either way he needs to get his teeth fixed to be taken seriously.

[sherry35] 29/9/2021 19:47

I do have one question about the misappropriated $1.763M US which may not be easily answered. What portion of the $1.763M US came from institutional fiancees? 50%? Either way their money wasn't effectively managed and directed to the business operations. So, are they starting to ask the same competency questions we are? Aren't they accountable to their share holders?

See post #4013. Will know soon enough.

[trader465] 29/9/2021 16:39

Almost! Lol

[imastu pidgitaswell] 29/9/2021 16:31

Almost as good as the AYM or GRL threads?

[trader465] 29/9/2021 16:27

This thread a great source of entertainment 👍

[imastu pidgitaswell] 29/9/2021 11:56

Don't worry about it Boris, it's clearly over your head.

[borisjohnsonshair] 29/9/2021 11:29

I'm nit sure what you are talking about - are you saying the management are now potentially being sued. For what - not spotting the theft?

[golden prospect] 29/9/2021 11:17

Re #4026, fair comment - yes

[imastu pidgitaswell] 29/9/2021 11:12

It's perfectly on topic - perhaps after the interims are published ("The Company also advises that it will publish its interim financial results for the six month period ended 30 June 2021 prior to the end of September 2021" - so tomorrow then) the directors here might show some commitment...

Regarding post 4023 (and your comment) - are you mentioning that from the perspective of potential libel? If so, I would invoke the defence (should it come to that) of it being truthful and (more than) fair comment.

[golden prospect] 29/9/2021 10:35

O/T

I would like to add that I have no holding in CEY, but note today's RNS 29SEP21
NED buys 40,000 @ 92.43p to hold 260,000 shares (Mark Bankes)

Then look to 14SEP21, CFO buys 15,000 @ 91.7p to hold 500,000 (Ross Jerrard)

Great to see directors aligned with other shareholders

[golden prospect] 28/9/2021 16:11

#4023 your observation re extra $1m implies we have been misled

[imastu pidgitaswell] 28/9/2021 15:55

And who are your referring to Boris - Kenny or me? Either way, if you think being unaware of that much money being misappropriated over that period of time is acceptable, for a finance director of a plc, then you must be even simpler than you come across – here and elsewhere.

I think someone else pointed this out on results day (I was golfing…) but in the previous RNS regarding the timetable, they (he) said “Deloitte Brazil have now completed a further review of all other electronic and physical records including electronic communications and have not identified any further instances of irregular cash withdrawals or other material transactions of an unusual nature”.

Read that again – ‘not identified any further instances of irregular cash withdrawals or other material transactions of an unusual nature’. And then they published the results with a further $1m+ of ‘material transactions of an unusual nature’.

Frankly CL should be consulting a lawyer, in fact 2 – one about the risk of being sued personally and the need to invoke his D&O liability policy, and one for the possibility of being criminally charged if he ever sets foot in Brazil. It may even be that the thought on the latter issue has occurred to him – which is why he is staying away.

[trader465] 28/9/2021 15:48

Hey Boris - why don’t you ask CL for a SRB ATM card to align your interests with those of the SRB workforce in Brazil? 😆🤣😂