DML - Discovery Metals

[pixel]

I ended up selling after all - which was probably just as well, given this morning's announcement of t/h and cap raising: http://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/displayAnnouncement.do?display=pdf&idsId=01321218

 

[prawn_86]

Takeover offer for $830m from a company called Cathay (not the airline : )

 

[skc]

Takeover offer for $830m from a company called Cathay (not the airline : )

WTF? It's in a halt yet some trades just went thru!?!

Did someone accidentally lifted the halt?! What are they doing at the ASX these days?

 

[barney]

Don't own any DML, but a friend does so thought I'd have a read on the takeover ...

Pretty interesting that the original Proposal was sent to DML management on Sept 21 ... and specifically requested a reply no later than Sept 28.

Why was there no announcement to the market in that time when ASIC guidelines clearly state there should have been.

I notice with interest that NAB were able to purchase another 5 million shares during the week in question prior to the Trading Halt being announced only yesterday

Not exactly squeaky clean over the last few weeks these guys in my opinion.

 

[Gringotts Bank]

Can a fundamentalist give a view on this as a short term trade? TIA. Currently 1.13.

 

[skc]

Can a fundamentalist give a view on this as a short term trade? TIA. Currently 1.13.

Operationally they are ramping up production and running into the usual issues,
but I'd say uou probably need to form a view about the ongoing takeover attempt above all.

 

[notting]

Hmmm.
Cathay Fortune Corporation and China-Africa Development Fund collective Chinese bidders walk away after lying/down ramping the quality of the resource clearly illustrated in the retort by DML in the third attachment.

Trying to save face and walking? or just enraged that DML did not budge an inch.
Going to come back agressively at some point?
Not sure.

Well done DML.

Saga -

View attachment a Initial Offer.pdf
View attachment b Update Rejecting 170.pdf
View attachment c Retort to Chinese Lies.pdf

DML share holders should put a class action together and sue Cathay Fortune Corporation and China-Africa Development Fund collective Chinese bidders for damages to the share price inflicted by the Chinese lies regarding the quality of the resource.

 

[skc]

Hmmm.
Cathay Fortune Corporation and China-Africa Development Fund collective Chinese bidders walk away after lying/down ramping the quality of the resource clearly illustrated in the retort by DML in the third attachment.

Didn't DML admit, in the 2nd target statement, that they had an error such that the Zeta open pit ore reserve revised down by 5Mt from an original number of 10.5 Mt?

It looks like a pretty material revision to me?

And why does't DML just grant due diligence? If nothing was wrong can't they just let Cathay take a better look and have the deal back on the table?

DML share holders should put a class action together and sue Cathay Fortune Corporation and China-Africa Development Fund collective Chinese bidders for damages to the share price inflicted by the Chinese lies regarding the quality of the resource.

Or may be the bidder should sue DML for mis-represented information?

When the Chinese bids for the company you cry foul. When the Chinese walks away from a bid you cry foul.

My view is that things did change for the worse in DML and therefore the "no adverse material event" condition is triggered. DML pushed the bidder away by not granting due diligence. Over the next few week or so it would be interesting to see if DML remains below the pre-bid price.

 

[notting]

I appreciate your points, however -

Didn't DML admit, in the 2nd target statement, that they had an error such that the Zeta open pit ore reserve revised down by 5Mt from an original number of 10.5 Mt?

It looks like a pretty material revision to me?

In the retort by the company they pointed out that it is not material and asked the Chinese clarify why they were saying it was material - The Chinese refused to answer that direct question!!
Further DML did not say, "Yeah, OK your low ball bid is something we'd consider now that we have told you the truth about the resource!! DML simply reported as usual and told the Chinese to go jump. If DML were trying to hide something they'd just keep hiding it and telling the Chinese to FO.

And why doesn’t DML just grant due diligence? If nothing was wrong can't they just let Cathay take a better look and have the deal back on the table?

It's called a bullying tactic by the Chinese to try and force due diligence - spying - at the very least. We will slur your resource quality unless you let us get into your operations and computer systems etc.!!!! Ala RIO bribery case against Stern Hu! Bribery is the way of life over there. You can't do business without it. But when they want to get into RIOs computers they use it as an excuse.

Or may be the bidder should sue DML for mis-represented information?

There is no damages claimable!
The low ball highly conditional Chinese bid which was rejected in the first place was nothing to do with DML operations. If I say to you, I want to buy your house for 250,000 and you say F@#$ off it's worth 900,000 thousand and where fixing the bathroom, I can't then sue you for not telling me about the bathroom as I made my first attempt at taking your house from you!!
I could sue you if I baught your house and you had lied on the section 32. DML has not been baught and they are clearly not hiding anything nor even disclosing anything of material value as explained in the retorte.

When the Chinese bids for the company you cry foul. When the Chinese walks away from a bid you cry foul.

Pretty much everything they do is foul, shocking and inhumane. They even admit this and think it's normal! The Chinese thing everyone is like that but they are better at it than everyone so this makes them superior! Decent people pointing it out is just a way to try to bring them down! It's got nothing to do with humane values! There is no such thing according to them it's just a western Bourgeoisie propagand tool.

Further the last thing you should assume is that it is a walk away!

Take SDL over the Christmas period the Chinese State owned financial media was singing the praises of the new acquisition all about to happen of SDL even the Ausi media picked up on the boasting from the state about the Chinese states great new ore aquisition and sung the same tune. The price shot up to from 32c to 39c with Muppet Christmas shopping.
What happened as the scheme of arrangement meeting was supposed to occur?
Silence.
SDL CEO has had to fly to China to ask them what the f@#$ is going on!

 

[skc]

In the retort by the company they pointed out that it is not material and asked the Chinese clarify why they were saying it was material - The Chinese refused to answer that direct question!!

When a 10Mt reserves all of a sudden lost 5Mt due to "accounting error", do I really need to prove that it is material?!

Force due diligence? Using your bathroom example, the prospective house buyer says "so you are fixing your bathroom, I didn't know that so I want come in and have a look and see what you've done. If you don't let me in then I won't buy your house."

Sounds like very reasonable negotiation to me. The seller has every right to refuse access, but that doesn't put the buyer at fault!

The rest of your post is just your usual thing against Chinese and is not really based on any real logic.

 

[notting]

When a 10Mt reserves all of a sudden lost 5Mt due to "accounting error", do I really need to prove that it is material?!

Force due diligence? Using your bathroom example, the prospective house buyer says "so you are fixing your bathroom, I didn't know that so I want come in and have a look and see what you've done."

Not for $250,000 for a 900,000 house with a $25,000 bathroom issue.

The buyer slerred the value of the company without due diligence and without being able to say why when requested. Reasonable? The value of the 5Mt was explained by the company in terms of material over all value.

The rest of your post is just your usual thing against Chinese and is not really based on any real logic.

It's not a thing against the Chinese it's the truth about the way they behave which people understimate and grossly under report.
It helps me trade for instance I sold SDL at .38,.39 when buying was everywhere and all the propaganda was running in the Chinese state media.
Another example I bought a bucket load of AGO when the Chinese down ramped the price. It's unbelievable to me that the media and analysts and so on keep crapping on about how it took everyone by surprise when it shot back up and pollution went berserk in China!! (Coal burning to catch up with the smeltering!) reported as a cold winter
It's logical and profitable! and an edge which I choose to share!

 

[skc]

It's not a thing against the Chinese it's the truth about the way they behave which people understimate and grossly under report.
It helps me trade for instance I sold SDL at .38,.39 when buying was everywhere and all the propaganda was running in the Chinese state media.
Another example I bought a bucket load of AGO when the Chinese down ramped the price. It's unbelievable to me that the media and analysts and so on keep crapping on about how it took everyone by surprise when it shot back up and pollution went berserk in China!! (Coal burning to catch up with the smeltering!) reported as a cold winter
It's logical and profitable! and an edge which I choose to share!

Your logic has always been this:

Premise - The Chinese is bad, manipulative and evil.
Observed fact - Chinese makes a bid, wants due diligence, withdraws an offer etc etc.
Interpretation - All these are bad, maniuplative and evil because they are done by the Chinese.
Conclusion - The Chinese is bad, manipulative and evil.

 

[notting]

What they do is evil because it's horrifically inhumane and grossly dishonest.
True.
Hence, play it.
Result - make dollars from cents or is that sense?

 

[Gringotts Bank]

Double bottom = 100% retrace from Sept highs.

Any spike in volume with small upside movement will be a good entry.

 

[mr. jeff]

Double bottom = 100% retrace from Sept highs.

Any spike in volume with small upside movement will be a good entry.

So it is a great entry right now before 4:00pm ?
Massive sell off by the guys riding the takeover from 1.60 down to 90c.

What is the general direction - buy or steer clear, a very attractive formation on the chart.

 

[Gringotts Bank]

So it is a great entry right now before 4:00pm ?
Massive sell off by the guys riding the takeover from 1.60 down to 90c.

What is the general direction - buy or steer clear, a very attractive formation on the chart.

I'm moderately confident at 91.5. This my second shot at it. GRY was better.

 

[notting]

I'm moderately confident at 91.5. This my second shot at it. GRY was better.

I'm in!

The Chinese are still on the register and at this point there is standalone potential.
One at 88.8 and one at 92.7 will continue to fill up boots if it gets volatile.

 

[notting]

Important announcement:

Stuart Bradley Sampson, a director, baught 2000 shares on market at .60.:nunchux:
Kick butt Bradley.

 

[Gringotts Bank]

lol, what a douche bag.

I was lucky to get out at break even.

 

[notting]

Did a 17% out of it's support at .60 the other day before settling at about 8% up.
This thing is just eating everything you feed it today! It's up 11% again.