I'm not always in favour of a buy-back - it depends on the...

I'm not always in favour of a buy-back - it depends on the circumstances - I just think MGX has more than enough to cash to do it especially when you consider that they have said they don't want to spend it all on one acquisition so why not diversify by buying back themselves.

A capital return is not a bad idea either - but why not do it after buying back 10% of the company at a discount so that the remaining shareholders get more bang for their back - likewise with a dividend.

As for volume - I think there is plenty of volume for a buyback - if 100 million shares can be shorted then 100 million shares can be bought back (while the price is below 25 cents) - a buyback can be spread across 12 months and actually be extended if they wish - CSL is a great example of a successful buyback. They've been doing it for years.

Furthermore a buyback will piss the shorts off and that is why I think in the case of MGX it is suitable - every time there is a jump in the IO price other IO stocks jump but MGX rarely does because the shorts are always capping it. There is a huge volume of shorts - if management were interested looking after the shareholders - they would at least get the share price higher - furthermore in the case of an acquisition the company might actually need to issue shares and then use their cash to pay down the targets debt (given there are a lot of distressed miners out there with debt) - therefore it would make more sense to have the share price higher not lower.

Just my thoughts - either way management need to do something - they missed the boat with gold stocks 12 months ago when they were dirt cheap - there are plenty of them around the mid west with head offices in Perth - what are they waiting for - otherwise their salaries should be reduced to less than 100k as in my view you really one need one person to roll over the term deposit every six months and Ext Hill can be run by their operations manager.

GLTA/IMHO