VAU - Vault Minerals

Hi all. Still keeping the faith ATM. Just wondered, now that apparently first lot of shares are issued(is that correct?) am I right in thinking that any change in holding by a substantial holder must be declared, however small? I guess this would also include any cgemanges as a result of dilution by new shares issued. I'm just wondering if that is correct, and also what is the usual time allowed from a change before announcement must be made. Any help would be appreciated, thanks guys.

Just noticed a whopping single trade of 56,000,000 shares at 8.22am today.

Can anyone shed any light on this? Thanks

Hi All, and some interesting developments by the look of it!

Firstly Rick64, its good to know you have not dropped out as I've got confidence that you will not regret your investment in time! I do worry about you when you are depending upon it as your future retirement fund, as no share is worth depending your entire future on (but having said that my holdings are now worth more than my house, lol!), and being the misplaced emotional shareholder that I am, and of MY RED shares, I have personal confidence that RED will finally reward those that stick it out. I don't believe for one minute that RED is due to dip much lower, if at all.

Buckfont, its an interesting observation you have made, all I note is that its a late crossing, maybe a change of ownership between associated holders possibly overseas. I can't see much else out of that, but should have you note that RED is now the domain of large Australian and overseas insto's so who knows how they move their holdings around to benefit tax or whatever other ploy they are up to.

As for the positive move on the gold price overnight I guess that doesn't help your expectation to rely on a falling gold price Hurricane to get shares lower, if there's any link between the two to start with! Despite the Aussie currency also strengthening overnight slightly there was actually a gain of A$10/oz, so if anything that should help the cause for RED if its relevant.

Andrew, as to your question regarding declaration of substantial shareholdings, if the rules are what they used to be, any move to a substantial shareholding (of 5% or more must be declared, and theoretically I think its 5 business days BUT in the case of those substantial shareholders not associated, ie non board member/management shareholders, it seems they tend to drag their feet if they want to play it that way! (The onus of that substantial shareholding notice is not RED's responsibility to declare, its the shareholder). But in the case of a change in substantial shareholdings, the declaration of the change in shares has only to be declared once there is at least a full 1% change in those holdings (that's what it used to be and i think that remains the case) - therefore if the take up shares pro rata to their holding in any capital raising you won't see the declaration made, unless they see it being strategic beneficial for their own purpose to do so! I would presume that most of the insto's that looked like taking up amounts via the placements, both the first tranche (that has already been allocated) and the proposed (to be voted on tranche) have done so on a pro rata basis except for any new participants which I understand there may well be (I understand that there might have been about 3 largish overseas insto's that have taken up shares for the first time via the recent plus proposed placements). I'm not sure if any of these 3 will come onto the register as new substantial shareholders, but I would like that to happen of course as it will confirm how strong the hold is by the insto's after the placements and how widely distributed the issue has been to new and influential insto's.

I note the RED quarterly has been released, I will comment on that later on today, except it seems very positive from my glimpse so far! (Today could be a stronger day IMO).

Beatle, my post was more of a conversation starter/observation rather than expectation. I actually purchased a parcel at this weeks low on Tuesday (not quite 56,000,000 though)
It's going to be interesting to see what effect Wednesdays decision will have on financial markets, especially oz's resource heavy one!

Its a shame you aren't in there for the 56 million plus a few more, it would be good to see a Substantial shareholder go on to RED's register by the name of Hurricane, lol!
In fact with regard to the RED share price, although its a sad state of affairs with the way the share price has been hanging for the past week and likely to continue, I also have been getting some dregs at these lower levels, and now hope to add a few more, dare I say it, at around 18.0 cents, hoping to get some more at that price before RED starts its next leg up! I'm hoping we will see another mini-dump during the day when someone wants to scare us out (and bring me further IN, lol!).

RED's quarterly report contained few surprises but confirmed and assured readers that everything appears on track to meet its deadline for first gold production in the second quarter of 2011, presumably late April or close to that time.
The cash position as of now is reasonably high:
At end of Sept, $48.7 million, plus placement (less fees) in Oct (around $16.3 million) = A$65 million, less anticipated quarter capex spend of an estimated $19 million, means RED likely to have A$46 million (plus US25 million loan drawdown in Dec, plus possible A$33.7 million second tranche placement). It suggests RED will have funds (if we assume A$1 = US$1) of around A$104 million at end of Dec 2010!!! Thats a lot of cash, which would amount to a cash backing alone of 8 cents per share (Ok, I know about half of that will be drawn down for the final capex requirement on Siana, but it illustrates that cash liquidity for RED will not be an issue in its development of Siana or its exploration efforts on Mapawa, IF we allow the second tranche of placement funds go through).
Mapawa commentary in the report is interesting, as there are clearly a lot of holes due to be reported on soon, and interestingly there is a comment that surface sampling confirms further anomalies outside of the main area of focus, but this is made as a bullet point in the summary with no back up information provided in the text that follows! Is that just sloppy reporting, or not relevant, or that it opens up a new chapter that RED didn't want out of the bag until it gives a more definitive status update report for Mapawa out soon as the assays are available for those 6 holes. I think the latter, but thats just my guess.
The gold-pre pay facility commentary refers to a minimum equity raise of $25 million as a pre-condition to drawdown, I wonder if RED put the commentary in that way to try to coerce the reader to presume we must vote YES on the second tranche of placement funds!!! I wonder if in fact the pre-condition is more about confirming specified funds and RED's cash liquidity that may well be in place currently in RED!!! I wonder.
All in all the report is positive in my reading of it, and confirms we will be investors in a gold producer soon enough. But I'm sure the fun and games (and wild ride) with the share price will continue for as long as the last placement remains outstanding!. After that (if the placement is approved) the share price should start reacting. If its not approved I can't see the insto's dumping, lol!!! It remains an interesting time for RED and us shareholders to ponder a few things. (Imagine the bots trying to out-con each other in licks of millions each trade rather then the 1 odd share being trade now by those Bots!)

Hi CEB2 (er Moit?),
I love your chartist's analysis (probably cos i think you are saying its got some positive signs and that it might be expected to move up based on certain charting criteria.

With regard to the voting at the AGM, WHEN you are ready to fill that out, you can put anyone who you think is going to attend the AGM, or if not sure best to put in Chairman who by default will have to vote on your behalf as you direct based on your indicated preferences.

Can I suggest you wait just a little longer, as I think there is something that needs to be clarified with regard to the Sprott pre-pay facility. In the quarterly its suggested that one of the pre-conditions to getting that loan RED has to have certain amounts of equity raised, and it might be a requirement that all current placements need to be completed before that pre-condition is achieved. I will call the company to clarify this and let you know what the outcome is to my call. I think its worth that clarification prior to putting in your vote. I realise that certain people (eg Yuyu) may have already voted No and indeed i may vote No as well but i want that clarification made first before i put my vote in. In fact if you want to rescind your vote, any subsequent proxy vote form you fill out effectively supercedes the previous vote that you put in, but I wouldn't suggest you do that as who knows if the company would want to acknowledge the second changed voting arrangement.

RED still have oodles of value left in it to move i believe, and I would hope that the move up on Friday afternoon is an indication that things are beginning to move, but there is no guarantee that it is since there have been many false starts so far to this re-rating happening.

Hi Guys, Just read Beatle's comment re the company's mention of "surface sampling in the immediate vicinity (Mapawa) identifies further anomalies" and that this may infer a further resource outside of the current main area of focus. Having once again studied the RED sediments in the bottom of the glass, I fully agree with Beatle that this is unlikely to be sloppy reporting, and that there is a very high likelihood of further announcements in this respect to come. Of course there is near news with the Mapawa assay results, plus the accelerated drilling program.Exciting times ahead imo. AB

It appears that all the senior RED guys are out of office, with at least some of them in the Philippines, with the likelihood that they will be away for a period of time, up to a week (due back next Monday). Therefore I can't make the inquiry I had hoped for.
It appears that things are starting to warm up with the level of activities onsite, both for Siana plus Mapawa, moving along nicely, and that is reflected in the share price maintaining its higher price of last week plus some!

Hi all RED club members, Ab and Beatle...

Beatle i seen you last Friday...

You were rubbing your hands together... I think it may have had something to do with the parcel of shares you'd bought the day before and the quick paper profit you had made, lol!!!

I myself would like to buy more as well, but with you and AB reading between the lines (which makes a lot of sense and which i agree with totally) i think i may have missed my opportunity, especially with the voting for the second tranche just around the corner. Ive been under the assumption Beatle that your a bit unsure as to how you will vote now. I was originally voting NO, but have since thought long and hard about it.

Just a couple of points... Why would management even consider the second tranche, if it wasn't going to be put to good use, ie, Mapawa, Siana development, or just extra cash in the bank. I'm of the view its Mapawa and possibly something to do with the area outside of the focus point.. I think they know its there, if they haven't already FOUND IT. Lets not forget the six drill holes awaiting results and the comment that Mapawa could totally ECLIPSE SIANA !!! What have they found ? Its just my thoughts of course, but I'm leaning toward voting YES as I'm sure they will use the funds appropriately and accordingly. And on that subject Beatle and AB, you guys have been with RED many many years and i will certainly be listening to your thoughts and comments as to which way we should vote. Your intelligence and knowledge is an absolute virtue to the RED thread as well as us newbies that don't know the whole story behind RED...

One other thing Beatle i was reading the annual report and noticed the top 507 people have more than 100,001 securities. Well we all know where you stand, 21, HA HA !!! I wish they would narrow it down a tad more. Id like to know where i stand among some of us RED club members, lol. Its actually nice to know your in the top 500 odd and i know my vote will count...

Just my thoughts, regards Moit, GO RED !!!

I read the annual report cover to cover in w/end.
Moit i had also compared the number of holders from last year up about 50% and biggest group of 10,000-100,000 are up 60%. Also surprsingly few instos who weren't there last year so i think the 31 new instos mentioned previously have very few shares which i think will add to competition for them at some point.

Hi All RED'ites, great to see some very interesting comments on the RED thread!
Mgm1a, your post regarding the size of the shareholdings on RED is most interesting, in fact I had never really considered what the individual holding of each of the 32 odd insto's referred to by RED actually was. Unless each of them holds RED in multiple names on the register, it appears that some of them must hold less than 4.83 million shares at 28 Sept 2010! That is a surprise, and I guess demonstrates that some of them have put a toe in the water, maybe also demonstrates their capacity to put more in if required! (Moit, actually if you consolidate my holdings you will find that I've got more than a toe in, actually more like my and my mrs entire body, lol!).

Maybe those insto's will be adding much more with this second tranche if WE approve it, and I do honestly believe, with no ego whatsoever, that we have the power to disapprove of it IF WE see it as in the best interests of RED. (I'm convinced that since all insto's apparently have been involved in tranche 1 placement they cannnot vote, and whilst G Edwards own votes will probably be voting FOR the resolution, most others allowed to vote could easily defeat the resolution if we want to vote as a block). But at the moment I remain undecided, and won't make that decision until I have had a chat with RED early next week. My biggest concern is all about whether RED will get the gold pre-payment facility if the second tranche is not approved. I believe we must ensure that RED does maintain liquidity, through this exciting phase of mine building at Siana, and can continue at its reasonable pace with the Mapawa exploration.

I should emphasise that this issue is all about ensuring the efficient use of share capital but if it ends up impacting on liquidity and capacity to complete the work onsite appropriately then of course there is no question in my mind we should support the resolution. But its not the ideal outcome of course.

Regardless, as Anderbond has stated, there may well be more to it than we are aware of, it might also have something to do with Mapawa OR the possibility that RED is concerned about other corporates considering a takeover. It could even relate to a deal with regard to its neighbours such as Philex, with the combination of Boyongan, Bayugo, and Mapawa! If was a merger of those particular gold porphyry assets then I would have no hesitation of supporting their decision.

With regard to Deutsche Bank and that declared (beneficial) holding, I wonder if they hold that in principle or that its been shuffled across to their bank as collateral from an existing holder who may have moved it from Bank of America. It may not be an exiting of any shareholders at all! That's only a thought, I have no basis for that comment.

What I do wonder is whether the Bots are now facing off against each other
or, as Inaflap, suggests there is a gentlemans agreement as to who's turn it is to buy 1 share! Its an intriguing battle each day, and I was convinced that the Bots were trying to coerce shareholders to sell at 19.5 cents yesterday and one of them finally succumbed just before close, unfortunately. Not sure but I think the insto's want RED remain around 19 - 19.5 cents until the AGM.

Hi RED clubhouse members, I have just received a letter from another shareholder urging me to vote against Resolution 10, on the grounds that smaller shareholders are being "shouldered aside for benefit of the big end of town". I have a lot of empathy with this view, and am of the opinion that the company should provide more explanation as to the reasons why the CR was doubled. While I believe there may be good reasons for this, it is time for the company to be more informative on its actions. AB

hi all, i have couple more comments from my annual report review, one i need to phone about but the second follows on from Beatle and Anderbond re 2nd placement and Mapawa.

On page 9 regarding financing, the inclusion of security over Mapawa in the terms sheets given to RED was "not considered an issue" until the discovery of a gold dominated porphyry changed the view substantially". Mapawa has obviously surprised even those in the know!

There is no mention on page 9 or remonstration about the warrants or their price...which confirms my earlier view i had that it may have be a piece of theatre / negotiating tactic with the ann. made.

So a possible reason to rush more equity on board may be a defensive tactic against possible unwanted offers or to bulk up in the event of some possible merging or regional interests.

Hi All, and another interesting post Mgm1a, re DB finance and Mapawa.

Regarding Mapawa, since RED's work and focus has been on Siana for a number of years, I have always viewed my main reason to invest (or punt, lol) in RED has been the fundamental value that was likely to develop for Siana, and in it finalising its feasibility study with around 1 million ozs of gold I have thought that most other investors have got in for Siana. That gave me the confidence in RED since its cash backing has always been around mid-30 cents levels, and it has always traded at such a discount, primarily due to the doubts whether RED could develop the mine to its true potential.

With Mapawa coming on and confirming huge potential I wonder what more recent investors, esp insto's, has caught their interest in RED? More recently with the first holes confirming exciting potential I see Mapawa adding considerable blue sky value to RED share price, to possibly push the share price closer to $1.00 and beyond over time if it comes to fruition with a big resource around 100 million tonnes. In my mind its Siana that is the engine for RED.

But maybe some of the insto's (especially the latest group from North America) are much more focused on Mapawa and its potential, and possibly even with a view that their investment will be taken out by some big corporate once Mapawa is confirmed the goliath that we hope for! Its interesting to note that most of the excitement with Mapawa has also developed since Anglo got off the RED register, it was certainly Anglo's intention to snatch Mapawa off the company with an opportunistic liaision developed early on when RED had no cash and was struggling along, and Anglo gave no assistance to RED during that time.

Now RED is cash rich, in the the transition from explorer to signficant low cost gold producer, and Mapawa is starting to demonstrate its potential!
Oh how things have changed for the better with RED.

And remember, when we refer to Mapawa we are actually referring to one specific prospect at LSY, the whole of the Mapawa MPSA is much larger in area and likely to hold other significant targets for future exploration, AND the Siana MPSA has ALREADY confirmed the existence of substantial geophysical anomalies at Madja, etc, that could turn into additional major gold-copper porphyries as well! In the early exploration of those anomalies on Siana MPSA RED didn't have the money nor time to explore with real conviction, it just dabbled in the area to prove that it had some exciting prospects outside of the Siana gold deposit!

Now all we need to do is hold our nerve that last bit before the final push to its true re-rating - I wish the insto's would take their foot off the brake!

RED trading the last couple of days has been been reasonably subdued, with most waiting out the time for the AGM and the outcome of the funding arrangements. I'm convinced that the Bot led trading has tried to maintain a pricing around the 19 cents plus/minus 1 cent, to ensure that RED doesn't run away with a substantial premium to the placement price in the meantime. In fact I think for those that are bullish RED and have an interest to add a bit more to their shares, now is a good time on the dips - I have been adding very slowly despite being way over-weight. My only concerns, of outside interference with things such as QE2/US economy, seem to continue to keep things reasonably positive although there is a possibility of a broader market pullback sometime soon - the markets have gone up and up the past month or so IMO.
I'm not sure if we will get a Mapawa update until later, possibly not until immediately before the AGM - IMO RED management clearly don't want to influence the markets too much prior to that all important vote, but they are caught in delicate position:
They don't want to put too bullish a picture out there on Mapawa potential in case it causes the share price to widen the premium from the placement price, but they will want to inform shareholders at the AGM of the latest Mapawa information, so my bet is that we will get an update about 2 days before the AGM (just after the postal votes are due in for the AGM!). Of course I might be wrong and be pleasantly surprised, but we have got a couple of weeks to see if that's how it pans out.
(You could argue that RED must maintain continuous disclosure, but its possible to hold off announcing results by delaying assay results being received and checked etc etc, or is that my cynical side coming out?).

As always, thanks to all for their continuous commentary about RED!

Yes, hoping for an announcement soon Beatle. You could certainly read between the lines in the Annual Report when they say things such as deciding not to go with certain finance arrangements because the arrangements could 'ultimately be very expensive should the company continue to expand the resource base...' Very exciting!

Hi RADV, its an interesting time with regard to the real activity that clearly is happening on the ground behind the scenes to the share trading but is really the main game. Yet the share trading is fascinating, at the moment we have 1main seller, of just over a million shares and each time someone takes some of those shares a little BOT bit (I presume!) adds to the sell side!

Whatever spin is put on the current situation, existing shareholders are potentially being diluted by a MASSIVE 30%....think about it! I hold this stock for the potential I see in both Siana and Mapawa, and my long-term view on gold pricing. I do NOT hold the company for their "ability" to manage all that extra cash right now. They are a mining company for God's sake, not an investment house! Sure, a little extra to tide them over is fine, BUT, I'm just totally against rubber-stamping this further dilution. I personally believe management has been blinded by Sprott et al as to the benefits of having US centric investors on board to help fund future expansion...yeah right! To think that these guys will stump up money in the future, to finance hopefully, Mapawa, is a pipe dream. They are realists and will jump off the merry-go-round, particularly if the current management continue with their seemingly laissez-faire attitude to both getting things done, and to reporting to shareholders. My vote is a VERY firm NO.

Hi Hugh_Jarzz, I get your drift!

As to your general sentiments as to the placement, I agree that the second tranche placement, which is subject to the vote at the AGM, appears to be a cash grab beyond what is required to complete Siana build plus carry on the exploration at Mapawa. The first tranche of 102 million shares has already been done by RED, and that guarantees the company is well cashed up for those funds required in the short term.

Your comment that "being diluted by a MASSIVE 30%" is factually incorrect of course, since the second tranche represents about 18.4% of the shares now on issue - as I say, the first tranche has already been done! The interesting thing, which I did note in a previous post, is that the resolution is double barrelled, in that it seeks BOTH the ratification of the first lot plus approval to do the second lot! That means if the resolution is not passed then RED MUST come back to shareholders for any future funds being sought within the following 12 months of having made the first placement, to seek refresh! That put's RED in an interesting situation, now it really requires shareholders agreement for any short term capital raising, and I for one didn't understand why they actually combined the ratification with the approval in the same resolution!!!

But as I have now made comment on many times, the ONLY issue that I have at present is a comment in the quarterly that the Sprott funding requires certain equity being raised as a pre-condition. I would like to confirm with management first before I make a decision on whether to vote no on the resolution. Clearly I don't want to have RED have insufficient cash for developing the project, but if thats not an issue then I would prefer we cut any additional dilution.