-
06-06-2021, 01:27 PM
#7361
Originally Posted by Brain
Yes we have the power to ultimately have the company fail and that is the most likely outcome. I would much prefer the shareholders to take control and use the remaining money to get to a point where we know for sure if NTL can be a profitable company or if in fact this is a very difficult task and the best option is to close down and not take any more money from the long suffering shareholders. Right now management and board will be continued to be paid until the money runs out and there is nothing we can do about it.
Attending the AGM might be a good start for you, closing down is something for the board to consider but theres gold in them hills!
-
06-06-2021, 03:29 PM
#7362
Originally Posted by tim23
Attending the AGM might be a good start for you, closing down is something for the board to consider but theres gold in them hills!
I have attended all AGMs since about 2014. I know there is gold in karangahake - it is why I originally invested. After 6 years of watching this company closely and being disappointed by the lack of progress I take a view that the board and management are not up to the task. As to this current board and CEO making the decision to close the company, they will do that when they run out of money.
The only thing the company has achieved is the rehabilitation of the mine. Unfortunately that is of no use if mine access (truck movements per day) limitations of blasting ( one blast event per day) and no current solution to processing the gold. No progress made on a mining permit after the 2 year bulk sampling period runs out. They paid a confidential undisclosed sum for Rahu and that went nowhere.
what I need to know and probably a number of other shareholders need to know is can we reasonably expect this mine to operate? For me that needs to come from a source independent of the current management and board. For me credibility is the big issue.
Great pity really I would have liked to be a shareholder in a profitable gold mining operation.
-
07-06-2021, 06:01 PM
#7363
Member
A lot of volume on the ASX today. No buyers left at 0.3 anymore.
-
08-06-2021, 09:42 AM
#7364
Originally Posted by Flugenbear
A lot of volume on the ASX today. No buyers left at 0.3 anymore.
I noticed that. I suspect GBE's 300% rise may have had something to do with it. Traders dumping to jump in over there. GBE announced a Licence to Mine in Africa. Just shows what can happen to low cap stocks when the stars begin to align.
-
08-06-2021, 02:04 PM
#7365
Member
The process for removing a director in New Zealand is relatively simple, and set out clearly in the Companies Act 1993. The default process is to:
- call a shareholder meeting for the specific purpose of removing the director in question. There can be other purposes but they must appear in the notice of the meeting;
- at the meeting, shareholders can remove the director through an ordinary resolution; and
- if a majority of shareholders votes in favour of the resolution, it passes and the director‘s removal from their office becomes effective.
https://legalvision.co.nz/business-s...n-new-zealand/
-
08-06-2021, 06:45 PM
#7366
Originally Posted by bucko
The process for removing a director in New Zealand is relatively simple, and set out clearly in the Companies Act 1993. The default process is to:
- call a shareholder meeting for the specific purpose of removing the director in question. There can be other purposes but they must appear in the notice of the meeting;
- at the meeting, shareholders can remove the director through an ordinary resolution; and
- if a majority of shareholders votes in favour of the resolution, it passes and the director‘s removal from their office becomes effective.
https://legalvision.co.nz/business-s...n-new-zealand/
Easier said than done. Minimum of 3 directors required so if shareholders remove one then there needs to be a replacement. I guess we need to replace a minimum of two directors and the people that put their hand up for the position need to have the necessary skills and experience. The next capital raise will only be successful if there is confidence in the board and management.
-
10-06-2021, 10:13 PM
#7367
-
10-06-2021, 11:08 PM
#7368
AMERICAN RARE EARTHS (AU)
2020 FY Annual Report to 30 June 2020:
https://americanrareearths.com.au/wp...ullysigned.pdf
Page 39
2020: A$ 22.5 K including Audit Chair Upgrade plus A$ 93.528 K Consulting & Management Fees
How Good is that ?
but wait there's more..
(retired 24 September 2020)
So will the 2021 ARR Annual Report (when it's published) disclose a further large bundle, perhaps retiring allowance or golden handshake etc ?
Was a full NTL CEO's Package still being paid while all this was going on ?
Last edited by nztx; 10-06-2021 at 11:29 PM.
-
10-06-2021, 11:27 PM
#7369
AMERICAN RARE EARTHS (AU)
2021 HY Annual Report to 31 December 2020:
https://americanrareearths.com.au/wp...03/2187839.pdf
Page 18
The ARR HY disclosure is aggregate Fees paid by the outfit - so possibly a dallop out of the A$99.445 K
(look at the increase in aggregate fees over HY the preceding period - $43.75 K)
Consulting Fees:
Asia Pacific Capital Group – an entity related to M Hill (Resigned 24 September 2020) -
HY 31 December 2020 - A$ 50K
HY 31 December 2019 - A$ 25K
-
10-06-2021, 11:56 PM
#7370
Member
Well this is all rather alarming.
I guess the NTL CEO has plenty of time on his hands as the last few years not much happening at NTL. But it just highlights how well overpaid he is for what he does.
But I'm sure he was doing this extra work in the weekend right?
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks