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 ??

mjr1234,

"there is no big seller"?

I cetainly agree there, IMHO, there must be more than one, because there have been an awful lot of shares sold in the last year, and IMO the bid has been kept low to stem the tide.

Today the bis and offer were lowered, and a lot of ADVFN holders seem to have jumped in and bought, and time will tell whether they was lowered in order to achieve some buys or not.


With regard to share options, so you think they are the same as a director paying cash out of his own pocket to buy shares in the market?

No I don't, but they are certainly a big incentive for the Directors to see the company does well, just as owning more shares would be.

There are many companies where the Directors don't own that many shares. And why would NML's buy shares out of their own pocket when they can award themselves them for free once certain targets are met?

I actually think there may well have been a "big seller" or "big sellers" in the past, but I have seen no evidence of such for about a month, since the 1.5M K trades went through. I saw this as the end of a dump.

The share price is responding a lot better to both buys and sells now, as illustrated by todays actions. This suggests no overhang either way.

Andy..He did say 'we'll hit the ground running' ..and probably meant it. The difficulties of working in Angola are many, not the least of which is the red-tape involved, even worse than in this country.Cross and Healy have only been there since last Easter and, in my opinion, have achieved a lot in that time, in such an awkward place to work.
In areas there may be diamonds only a bit over a metre down.However, most will be much deeper than that, as the 'gaimperos' know only too well from having 'holes' cave in on them.
NML is a speculative stock.
The upside is the prospect of a Joint Venture with a major for the kimberlite on their tenement and the prospect of a take-over by one of the bigger players.

mjr1234,

Exactly, "why would they buy them now when they can award themselves free ones!", - That's what they have already done!

And that doesn't cost them a penny, so no risk (to them) there then.

I personally prefer to see directors putting their hand in their pockets and buying at least some shares, to show faith in themselves and their company, and feel this sends the right signal to the market.

takahe,

I agree they have achieved quite a lot in a difficult place, the jungle of Angola, the red tape and corrupt officials must take some dealing with.

However, Shane said that last August, so people's expectation was they would be mining in Sep/October, whereas the reality has been far different.

I still do not think they have a full mining licence to export their diamonds, although they are producing, as I would have expected an RNS to confirm this.

With regard to the kimberlite, do you know what percentage of kimberlites in the world are economically viable? I believe the figure is LESS thean 10% (more in Botswana) so it is certainly only a prospect at this time.

takahe - 08 Jun'05 - 14:59 - 654 of 656
"NML is a speculative stock."

LOL Most stocks quoted on AIM are..!!!

Andy
It is a question of whether he deliberately misled investors or not. No worse than John Teeling's 'mining diamonds in eight weeks, said in February 2004. I know that kimberlite is a long haul but my main reason for investing is the take-over possibility by a major. DeB are very keen to get back into Angola, for one. Petra have managed to do well...I don't see why NML should be any different.Most mining companies seem to run very late with their 'promises'.
At least the directors are not awarding themselves loads of free options at the moment,like many other companies.

ASMITH- I think NML is more speculative than some. Angola is becoming more safe and is very resource rich. It will be interesting to see what the next RNS yields. Don't forget, this land has been looked at by the Badenhorsts when they worked for Monroe Minerals.

takahe,

I am not accusing SH of deliberately misleading anyone at all, and I think it's EXACTLY the same as JT's "we'll be mining in 8 weeks", they both didn't know what they were talking about!

Neither is a mining man, let alone a diamond miner.

Petra are doing ok, but they have not explored much of their kimberlite so far, and at their recent presentation, they didn't release their grades!

If you check the RNS for last year, they have already awarded themselves the options, November I think.

no...that was in lieu of fees
The options do not start until 8p for 21days

The fact that the Directors chose to be paid in shares rather than cash is equivalent in my mind to buying shares out of their own pocket.

takahe,

No they did not take options in lieu of fees, they took shares.

With regard to the options I was talking about, see the RNS for early November 2004.

mjr1234,

No they probably took their fees in shares because they were low on funds, and didn't have much choice, which is not a criticism, in fact probably the only thing they could do.

That is not the same as buying shares out of their own pocket! (IMHO)

If my salary was 1000 per month say, and one month I got paid 1000 shares instead at 1 each, then that is the same net effect as if I had took my month's wage and bought 1000 shares at 1 with it.

Anyway my point of view is that the main benefit to shareholders in the long-run of Directors owning shares, is that they provide a big incentive to build up the value of the company, ie their interests are aligned with those of the shareholders and this is the case however they acquired the shares.

This in my mind is a better situation than companies where Directors get paid big cash bonuses whatever happens to the company share price.

The Badenhorsts had the option of taking 90:10 shares:cash or 60:40 and chose the former. That's good enough for me.They have been on that ground before!

mjr1234,

Sorry but I can't agree with that, they didn't buy their shares, they exchanged their fees for shares, almost certainly because cash was low, and there was probably no other choice at the time.


I agree with your second point, but sadly, even after the fees to equity swap, messrs Cross and Healy don't own that many shares, much less than the average ADVFN holder for example.

On your last point, I do agree, although in NML's case there wasn't the cash to pay "big cash bonuses" anyway.

Who are these mysterious "ADVFN holders" and where can I find out their holdings?

mjr1234,

They are not "mysterious" at all IMHO, and if you read the NML thread on ADVFN, they reveal their holdings from time to time.

There is at least one person with a claimed 2,500,000 approx, another around the 2 million mark (claimed), and several around the claimed 1 million mark.

takahe - 08 Jun'05 - 16:33 - 666 of 668
The Badenhorsts had the option of taking 90:10 shares:cash or 60:40 and chose the former. That's good enough for me.They have been on that ground before!

>takahe & mjr1234

I have to agree with Andy. When the Badenhorsts agreed the deal, it was for 60/40 cash to shares. Obviously, because the company was short of working capital, they were asked if they would accept 10/90, cash to shares. They accepted, because they were offered a sweetner in the form of a better share price. It was as if the company had given them an extra $195,000 (@$0.10 per share) to accept the deal. The Badenhorsts could then sell the shares on the market and make back the cash they would have been given.

It's not a case of them wanting shares rather than money. If I had a deal with you for 1000 to buy your car, but couldn't stump up all the cash, just 500, but then I offered you a Rolex worth 750 that you could sell (and pocket the extra 250) you'd be mad to turn it down.

It's the same case with the convertible loan. The person who gave the company the loan was opting to receive the shares (not cash) a year after drawdown and 6% interest. But they forwent the interest, because they could sell the shares immediately to minimise the risk that the shares would lose value. They fixed the deal for the conversion at 4p per share. So if the share price went below this, the lender stood to make a loss on the loan. If however he recovered the shares and sold them above 4p, then he could make a profit for every amount over the 4p that he originally did the deal for. We saw from the RNS that only 13,333,334 shares were transferred to Al Wakalah, so the other shares may have been disposed of, to minimise the risk.

The Badenhorsts simply accepted an offer they couldn't refuse. An extra $195,000 for doing nothing except having the difficulty of selling the shares. They've already sold 1 million shares. I wonder how many more they intend to dump?

Blimey, there's some big-hitters over there then!

I do read the ADVFN thread from time to time, but didn't realise anyone held such a large amount.