I belive if NP gets approved, there will definately be a buyout of Taseko. Taseko is too small a fish to pull off and mine NP. Add to this the fact that Russ and the rest of the stooges that sit on the board are idiots only adds fire to the thought of a buyout. As the Chinese are building their economies and are in dire need of copper, look for the Chinese to make a play for TGB. If they were smart, they should have bought TGB when it was trading in the $2 range. Share price without NP approval is close to $2 anyway so you are getting NP for free in my opinion. With NP valued at much higher than $2 you are getting a free call option on NP with not much dowside risk if it doesn't get approved.
Looks like TGB has been moving up slowly for the last few weeks. I expect a similar move up until decision time. Same thing happened the last time before it was rejected and the share price tanked. The last time it was trading around $6 before news leaked out that Prosperity was rejected.
I say NP gets approved this time round. Too much money at stake and too many jobs at stake particuarly when commodities are takiing a dive these days. I hope it gets approved because I plan on seling this loser the minute the stock spikes higher on news. Still have a ways to go to recover my $5.67 average price though.
Good luck to all longs.
There has been talk of buy out for well over five years any ways, so I do not think a buy out is going to happen. Although about 4 to 5 months ago there was a mine bought close buy TGB's, it is possible. I bought in at different price ranges and did pretty good job with selling extra and rebuying at the 2.00 mark. So made more than enough to cover my losses. I did get nervous this last time around at that 2.00 dollar level and could kick myself for not buying more now. There was some talk that if TGB does not get approval this could have a big dip. Well I do not trust the Government to over come the political interest groups coming up. My reasoning for not buying.
If there is an actual final approval for NP , buyout offers would seem to be very probable ...the question : what would be a realistic price in such event ?.. The inherent value of TGB would of course increase exponentially .Meanwhile - the outcome is subject to political vagaries ...... At this juncture - a highly leveraged sweepstakes ticket , with a fair risk- reward ratio ( I agree that reason may not necessarily prevail)
I am not so confident on a strong cash buyout offer occurring though. Most of the majors are going through retrenching and writing down\selling off the assets that they spent the last several years acquiring. Their shareholders are demanding profits, not asset growth and project pipelines. Plus there is the Franco-Nevada gold stream agreement still in play. It is not necessarily that attractive to a major with the money to develop the mine themselves. On the other hand, take a smaller miner, like HBM, $8/share, market cap of about 1.3 billion and about 1 billion in cash. A merger of Taseko and HudBay would look pretty nice. HudBay would gain more cu to complement their current mines and their Constancia project in Peru as well as further diversify their sources of income. Taseko's Gibraltar experience could assist HBM with Constancia's open pit porphyry project, most of their experience is underground. The Taseko operations would gain access to the cash to build New Prosperity without having to sell off part of the mine of give more away in lopsided gold stream agreements. I would be happy with a 1 for 1 share swap. The biggest problem in a cash buyout offer would be finding someone with a couple extra billion to spend on a green field that is still going to cost them another billion or so. I think everyone would agree that a $5/shr ($1 billion) offer is almost insulting and $10 ($2 billion) might be expecting to much, but a $7-8 shr/cash combo offer from a company like HudBay that has enough to finance the project on its own, maybe.
LIMA (Reuters) - Canadian miner HudBay Minerals hopes to buy at least one greenfield project in the next year and expects to boost annual copper output nearly fivefold by 2016, the company's CEO told Reuters on Thursday.
Chief Executive David Garofalo said higher industry costs and lower metal prices mean medium-sized companies like HudBay (HBM) are better positioned than ever to buy up small exploration firms.
Well, I think we do really need to consider the politics here and the behavior of the current Conservative gov't. Since the original EA panel, the fed gov't has pretty much gutted the environmental legislation, and placed an MP whose is both a member of the First Nations and known to be someone who is very compliant and toes the party line. There is little doubt that having her succeed the last three very "white" guys is to deflect potential criticism that the environmental policies and decisions are all been taken without consideration of the FN interests. Also, we are entering the final two years of the current election cycle, and this mine coming online about the same time as the next elections will give the current gov't the ability to not only show how they have helped create jobs, but the $200+ mill / yr in extra tax revenue from the mine will pay for a lot of pet projects in marginal constituencies, or allow them to meet their balanced budget target before the election. I believe, that as long as there are no "significant adverse environmental effects" reported by the panel, the present gov't will approve the mine. The FN and "green" lobby is not part of their traditional voter base and probably never will be. To maintain their majority government, all they need to do is maintain their core and wait for the center\left to fragment again. Even though they have a majority gov't, they had less than 40% of the popular vote. Having listened to and gone through all the EA panel testimony and presentations, I saw little there that could lead to a definite "significant adverse environmental effect". Most of the major effects from the last review have either been drastically reduced, or as a result of legislative changes, no longer applicable. I think the worst the panel could say is that it is not currently known if there may be unmitigable significant adverse effects or not. Enough wiggle room for approval with conditions.
IMHO it is simply optimistic anticipation of the CEAA decision which is due by the end of October I believe. Last time the exuberance was 10 times what it is now, which is a little more comforting if the decision goes against TGB again there is not as far to fall.
I just don't see a "collectivist" society screwing the majority to appease a very small and vocal minority. But then again I don't pretend to understand how socialists think. Especially the way they do socialism in Canada, which seems to be working out fairly well. Truly an anomaly.