NML is due its interrim results now, last year it was the 28th of this month.

They are setting up a new site to explore/research/analyse and all the equipment to do this should be on site now, and drilling should start soon, all this extra news should be covered in the interims.

does anyone have any further positive views on this company ??

takahe - 28 Oct 2005 07:46 - 1585 of 1586
Morning Andy..I know that. They did say that they had enough funds to see them through to production, until they changed tack. People are not necessarily relaxed about the change of plan. They didn't know about it until it was announced!
I'm not sure, you can ask Ian who knows more about it than me, but I think they had access to some core samples from Catoca...
'ill-fated' is not the way THEY see it..

Very interesting....I wonder what Catoca will say if we ask if they handed over the data willingly or had it purloined?

Anom..what a silly remark..don't you realise that a lot of the original data on which the independent geologist based his report came from the Angolan authorities in the first place?
You seem to assume that Catoca and NML are at war...their geologists are helping NML....

According to the RNS, it is the Endiama geologists that are working with NML and although Endiama are part of the Catoca partnership, I would suggest that the Endiama staff are reporting directly to Endiama...NOT to Catoca.

IMO Catoca would be a beneficiary of any information collected, but I very much doubt that Alrosa or Odebrecht Mining Services or Daumonty Financing, the other Catoca partners, would be happy about their data being handed over to someone with whom there is no contractual relationship and possibly even a commercial rival to boot.

Anom..you have no idea of what the situation is..as usual, you start to concoct a story to fit your conspiracy theories. You will put a negative spin on anything, so there is no point in discussing it with you. Two days ago, you were claiming that AFD would hide their results until December and sneak out bad news..

Amities Anon . l agree 100% . Always rememeber a consensus of opinion constitutes little more than juste that . ..Not even a hypothesis . Alas , l am a seaon ticket holder at O. Boredeaux. Even when we lose ( which is frequently we always say things will improve; and grasp to try to see any and every positive aspects of the team . BUT they never do improve ..Lack of money . Not unlike SEO ,,,. ...Anyway anyone heard anything more of the rights issue ? ..Only reason i ask is that i was offered several millions of these in a" distres " sale equating to O.80p , ,,At current levels that may appear attactive terms : but if, as is anticipated, a rights issue is placed at 0.5 ,it equates to a disaster .....Asking around a great number of people apparently " in the Know " are at a complete loss as to would underwrite such a dog. @ J.....

The Finals are not due out today..They have until end of December.

Absolute rubbish again Takahe - you know full well (or should do by now) that NML are Australian registered and as such have to report their finals 4 months after the financial year end. Since their financial year end is on 30th June each year, they are obliged to report the same information to the AIM before the end of October. Otherwise they are disclosing information in one country that is not freely available elsewhere in the world.

Last year's Finals were announced to the market on 29 October 2004, being the last working day of that month.

This year, they have the choice of either announcing this afternoon, amongst the rest of the Friday afternoon trash, when the traders have all left for the weekend - OR - waiting till Monday 31st and watching as the market tears them to shreds the very next morning.

Or are you deliberately attempting to deceive the readers on here Takahe?

>TheFrenchConnection

I'm not surprised that you've been offered a great deal of shares at 0.8p. According to my figures, the Market Makers have millions of them on their books and would rather not be holding them if they crash in value.

I have heard a rumour, about 20 minutes ago, that a certain Patrick(?) Johnson is buying up large amounts of NML. Even my source can't be certain if this is true, there is confusion over the similarity between this name and the Chairman of NML. However, it might be that a certain mining giant, is attempting to take advantage of the bad news expected in the finals and the dilution, to acquire a significant holding in NML and then use this to control/transfer the alluvial license.

Remember that you heard it here first!

Anomalous - I have just spoken to their Financial Director ( 07768631286) in London...I think he knows better than you when his Finals are due. You are confused about the Australian thing, as we have all pointed out to you before.
You feel free to keep doing your count-down, though..but you'll need a larger number of days available
I don't remotely try to deceive people Anom..I try to find accurate information..I leave half-truths and deception to you

The Chairman of NML is not called Patrick Johnston..he is David Johnston...
I have emailed your post above to SH..I am sure he will be interested..

Interesting rumour Anom, but not clear about your comment - care to state it in another way?

Just so everyone is clear, here is a post by Mclellan on MoneyAM earlier today:

takahe - 28 Oct 2005 10:43 - 1595 of 1596
Anomalous - I have just spoken to their Financial Director ( 07768631286) in London...I think he knows better than you when his Finals are due. You are confused about the Australian thing, as we have all pointed out to you before.
You feel free to keep doing your count-down, though..but you'll need a larger number of days available
I don't remotely try to deceive people Anom..I try to find accurate information..I leave half-truths and deception to you

and here is a post from the thread on AD^FN:

mclellan - 28 Oct'05 - 09:53 - 2414 of 2418
Finals are not due out today....

If Healy is telling you they don't have to report in October, then, as an accountant, he's certainly not telling you the full truth. Here's the proof:

These are screen dumps taken from the Australian Accounting Standards Board website http://www.aasb.com.au



and this is from the Australian equivalent of the Companies Act which is the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997, which can be located here:
http://www.aasb.com.au/pronouncements/standards_index.htm



As you can see quite clearly, it states that the Annual Report must be prepared and filed as follows:

The directors of a Commonwealth authority must:

(a) prepare an annual report in accordance with Schedule 1 for each financial year; and

(b) give it to the responsible Minister by the deadline for the
financial year.

The deadline is the 15th day of the 4th month after the end of the financial year.

Note: The deadline will be 15 October if the financial year ends on 30 June.
Financial year is defined in section 5.

So unless Healy and NML have filed for an extension, they must have reported by the 15th October 2005. Under the AIM regulations, price sensitive information that is freely available elsewhere must be reported to the AIM by RNS.

I think you had better get on the phone to Healy and ask if he understands the accounting law of his own country, because he shows an amazing lack of knowledge for one supposed to be a qualified accountant.

I would remind you to check the dates that the previous Finals statements were published by RNS. They are in October.

bundu - 28 Oct 2005 11:25 - 1597 of 1598
Interesting rumour Anom, but not clear about your comment - care to state it in another way?

>bundu

Frankly no - the rumour is what it is. The source was not certain who the buyer might be, but we both think that it is NOT the current chairman of NML.

It is certainly possible that the people presently exploring the C9 kimberlites are interested in combining the hard rock and alluvial ore, i.e. processing both at the same time, then shipping the concentrate down the road to Catoca for final processing.

On the other hand, the person that is rumoured, may just be a UK speculator.

OR, it might be another Market Maker inspired rumour being fed out to generate sales on the last few days before the news is published.

Anomalous- RING HIM YOURSELF...why on earth would I say it, if it wasn't TRUE!
The results would come out later today, if it was the case.Wendy says you can never admit to being wrong ...
Your premise is wrong...they are AIM listed, in this country..
All you have to do is ring him...I've put up the number ..and in case you think I'm getting someone to impersonate him (!) ..check the number on the last RNS!!!! That's where I got it from..it would just take you two minutes..

Some of you may have noticed that the webpage I screen-printed above was for the Corporations Act 1997 and the company is presently following the Australian Corporations Act 2001.

Just so we are clear on this, here is the screen print from the Corporations Act 2001. You can see that the reporting to members (that's the shareholders by the way - YOU) must be made by either:

a) 21 days before the AGM (which is normally held before the end of November) or
b) 4 months after the end of the financial year

WHICHEVER IS THE EARLIER

315 Deadline for reporting to members

Public companies and disclosing entities that are not registered schemes

(1) A public company, or a disclosing entity that is not a registered scheme, must report to members under section 314 by the earlier of:

(a) 21 days before the next AGM after the end of the financial year; or

(b) 4 months after the end of the financial year.

Note: For the deadline for holding an AGM, see section 250N.

takahe - 28 Oct 2005 11:44 - 1600 of 1602
Anomalous- RING HIM YOURSELF...why on earth would I say it, if it wasn't TRUE!
The results would come out later today, if it was the case.Wendy says you can never admit to being wrong ...
Your premise is wrong...they are AIM listed, in this country..
All you have to do is ring him...I've put up the number ..and in case you think I'm getting someone to impersonate him (!) ..check the number on the last RNS!!!! That's where I got it from..it would just take you two minutes..

Are you seriously refuting the website and Australian law that NML operates under? - because if you are, you should check the interim accounts for NML and confirm that they are subject to the AUSTRALIAN Corporation Act 2001.

see for yourself:
http://www.new-millennium.com.au/download/financials/interim_public_nml_31_12_04.pdf

NEW MILLENNIUM RESOURCES LIMITED ABN 31 075 830 938 and Controlled Entities

please note the Australian registration number.

Auditors independence declaration under Section 307C of the Corporations Act 2001 The auditors declaration is set out on page 16 and forms part of the directors report for the half-year ended 31 December 2004.


NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE HALF-YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2004
NOTE 1: STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
(a) BASIS OF PREPARATION
The half-year consolidated financial statements are a general purpose financial report prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Corporations Act 2001, Accounting Standard AASB 1029: Interim Financial Reporting, Urgent Issues Group ConsensusViews and other authoritative pronouncements of the Australian Accounting Standards Board.
The financial report covers the economic entityof New Millennium Resources Limited and its controlled entities Angola Resources Pty Ltd and Greenland Minerals Pty Ltd. New Millennium Resources Limited isa company incorporated and domiciled in Australia and listed on the Alternative Investment Market (AIM) in the United Kingdom. Unless otherwise stated, all figures are in Australian dollars.
It is recommended that this financial report be read in conjunction with the annual financial report for theyear ended 30 June 2004 and any public announcements made by New Millennium Resources Ltd and its controlled entities during the half-year in accordance with continuous disclosure requirements arisingunder the Corporations Act 2001.
The accounting policies have been consistently applied by the entitiesin the economic entity and are consistent with those applied in the 30 June 2004 annual report except as disclosed in note 12.

Anom..just RING HEALY....he is a well-qualified Company Accountant...I would think he knows the rules as they pertain to NML...

I don't need to phone him, as NML's own reports state that they are Australian domiciled and subject to the Corporation Act 2001.

I ask again - ARE YOU STATING THAT NML IS NOT SUBJECT TO AUSTRALIAN LAW AND SPECIFICALLY THE CORPORATION ACT 2001?

Anom....Since I am not remotely expert in Australian law, I can't give a meaningful comment. I would assume you are not, either. It is possibly your interpretation of it that is wrong.
I ask again...are you too scared to ring him? You don't have to give your name! Are you inferring that he didn't tell me that?

It's not a case of being scared - it's a case of the LAW.

The law is quite clear. If Healy is telling you that NML is not Australian, then prey tell us when this monumental change occurred?

If they are Australian, then the law is there in 'glorious' black and white!

Are you stating that the Corporation Act 2001 does not apply to them? Yes or No?