I think there's a bit of a chicken and egg discussion happening here. I can see where you're coming from, but to express it in a form that suggests that management's sole responsibility is to increase the share price (which is how it comes across to me) is not only inaccurate, but also dangerous. I might be misreading your intent, and I have no qualms about apologising if so; that's simply the way it reads to me.
I do agree with you there. I might quibble about the 50% of the company - strictly speaking, it was around 20% of Peak itself, and sufficient of the (previously wholly owned) subsidiary that holds the rights to the prospective mine to effectively give them 50% of the African assets, rather than being 50% of the company itself - but that's really just semantics, rather than the substance of the argument. It certainly does put a significant dampener on all the foreshadowed future development (including the niobium/tantalum resource north of Ngualla, and any of the remaining gold assets that might still be held by the company - can't remember if they've offloaded those or not), and I think that's why the share price is still languishing this way.
That said, I would argue that that little incident made it pretty clear to those who have been following the company that the options would be unlikely to make the target.
Fundamentally, I think we're just arguing cause and effect, rather than the fundamental issue: that there has been severe issues with the way management has handled fund raising (in my mind, that's the one glaring problem with the company, and has been since I got in).
No bet on that from me. I don't take blatantly obvious sucker bets.
On the bright side, the 50% of the company does get us funding through to a decision to mine, and my feeling is that by that stage, we'll be in a much better position to fund through debt, rather than raising capital. Yes, that brings its own set of risks, but if we reach the point where that's a serious option, it would seem to me to be a no brainer - even allowing for interest costs, it'd be better for the long term shareholders than the alternative. Short term pain, yes, but much greater long term gain. I believe (please note the caveats and caution in my words) that we're now past the point where management could realistically argue a need for raising more capital, and that gives me hope that we're now in a "wait and see" pattern, rather than being particularly worried about downside.
All that said, I'm not in a hurry to increase my holdings; I'm not comfortable risking more than I already have (and I'm pretty seriously in the hole here, unfortunately; the bounce I expect to see once there's solid progress and news is most likely to bring me to break even, rather than a significant profit, I fear.)
Maybe one day you and I will raise a glass to each other at the one dollar party. Long, long way away, though, alas (if that day ever comes).
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- Where is xindongzuitaohua?
I think there's a bit of a chicken and egg discussion happening...
Featured News
Add PEK (ASX) to my watchlist
(20min delay)
|
|||||
Last
19.5¢ |
Change
-0.005(2.50%) |
Mkt cap ! $51.85M |
Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
20.0¢ | 20.5¢ | 19.5¢ | $26.52K | 132.5K |
Buyers (Bids)
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
5 | 92293 | 19.5¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
21.0¢ | 4000 | 1 |
View Market Depth
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
5 | 92293 | 0.195 |
4 | 195105 | 0.190 |
5 | 222010 | 0.185 |
3 | 125141 | 0.180 |
1 | 17000 | 0.170 |
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
0.210 | 4000 | 1 |
0.220 | 12534 | 2 |
0.230 | 13540 | 1 |
0.240 | 6875 | 1 |
0.250 | 12200 | 2 |
Last trade - 16.10pm 29/03/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
|
|||||
Last
19.5¢ |
  |
Change
-0.005 ( 2.50 %) |
|||
Open | High | Low | Volume | ||
20.0¢ | 20.0¢ | 19.5¢ | 6439 | ||
Last updated 14.19pm 29/03/2024 ? |
Featured News
PEK (ASX) Chart |