The seemingly odd one out in this feud is Peter Newton (All-States etc). Why has he sided with the Perth crew?
It seems that he sided initially so as to get the required 5% to call the EGM and also to oust the 2 women of course. He has continued to associate though, so he must have a vested interest. So, what's he thinking!!
He is of course the non-Exec Chairman of both MetalsX (MLX) and Westgold (WGX). Not having recently looked, I would dare say that he is still a big shareholder in each company.
WGX demerged from MLX a year or so back, with WGX getting all of the gold assets and MLX keeping all of the rest - copper, tin, nickel etc. As part of that arrangement WGX took over the Fortnum gold areas formerly owned by AUR/RNI. As part of that deal WGX got the gold rights to AUR's 80% of Forrest-Wodger-Big Billy. FEL holds the remaining 20% and is free-carried until a decision to mine is made. It looks potentially messy, eh!
Anyway, AUR and WGX have a business relationship as a result; so they are connected. WGX is a pure gold player though, so it would not be interested in AUR's copper. That should therefore discount PN's interest in AUR as the Ch of WGX.
But what about as Ch of MLX?
The last time I saw a top sh'r list MLX held 3m shares in AUR - that was post-consolidation too! That sh'g arose from MLX's sale of Chunderloo to RNI/AUR (that's another story tho'). That holding is probably irrelevant so far as MLX having a real interest in AUR, but I could be wrong there. The main point is that MLX is now a serious copper producer (albeit with some mining issues). It therefore might have its eye on AUR. So, is that why PN is part of the disrupting alliance?
Or is he just sick and tired, as a big shareholder, of the way AUR is being run!!
AUR Price at posting:
6.7¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
