Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Pip56 They aren’t going to cut of their nose to spite their face, the loan has been extended to the end of December 2024. This is a business set for recovery, at pace. They aren’t going to let it go bankrupt just because the delisting is voted down. That doesn’t make sense
Mcap £300k
IEnergiser was de-listed
The business is not primed for recovery. You need to read between the lines. Bayford and Harwood are the majority shareholders and they loaned the company with money that took it further into debt 'with strings'. If the delist does not happen then the logical strategy is to call the loan on the basis that the company can not afford the repayments.
As a shareholder you have a choice. Take what's on offer when the business is delisted or get nothing when it is declared bankrupt. This isn't a recovery play. Bayford and Harwood are working on a strategy that was forecast way, way back.
Will this be another Itsarm..?
Look what happened with there share price recently, similar situation
But they haven’t got 75%, still around 17.5% short of that so hold on to your shares and vote it down. The business is primed for recovery which is why they are doing this IMO. Other recent examples of this are Parsley Box, Solgenics and Energiser to name only 3, there are more
It was always the strategy to take the company private. The first attempt failed so the shares were bought up and eventually the rules changed to allow the majority shareholders to increase the percentage holding without triggering a formal offer. The same players then loaded the company with debt but made sure the money was repatriated through interest and admin charges. Finally the open offer was a cynical move to take share ownership up to 60%, effectively removing any challenge when the decision to delist took place.
The trading report is disingenuous. The company has been set up to fail and that was obvious 2 years ago. There have been some sharp practices here and I am sure a good many decent folk will have been burned along the way.
The loan conversion will be at 0.5p well below current SP. Also, they need 75% of votes cast to delist but they’ve only got around 57% in the bag, presumably Bayford and Harwood so the delisting could be voted down. The RNS talks about there currently being a recovery in the business, at pace. It appears the true reason for trying to delist is to relieve PI investors of their shares at a rock bottom price now so the large shareholders get more of the pie later.
That’s it
I am hanging on here hoping for a miracle perhaps . A right shower .
cheers
I stand corrected. My apology.
They didn't sell the commercial gas pipelines only domestic
Hello lotusseven. FCRM sold its gas pipelines and domestic connections in 2019 to ES Pipelines Ltd. The regular income they received from the gas supply was also sold without retaining royalty rights. ES Pipelines paid £33m for the pipelines over 4 years and the money from that pipeline sale was used to pay off loans, more recently it has been used to support the business. The sale RNS was released on 23 Dec 19 and subsequently confirmed 4 Mar 20. Furthermore the agreement was that if FCRM installed future gas pipes they would be offered for sale to ES Pipelines.
So you are either 3 years behind the curve or you know of some other gas pipeline income on the books?
Morning PIP56, you are quite correct except in one respect - Through their ownership of gas pipelines Fulcrum do distribute energy and receive tariff payments from various suppliers for doing so. This is the most attractive part of an unattractive company as those pipelines have an asset value in excess of £20 million and produce reliable long-term income, probably around £2 million per annum - why the heck they don't sell them to refinance the business I don't know?
QuantumStar - I am pretty sure you have posted something similar before. My understanding of what you have written is that you believe FCRM, as a producer of renewable energy, should aim to sell directly to the public. You preface this assessment with a hope that you do not lose money.
There is an irritating and much overused phrase throughout the market chat boards. Do Your Own Research. Never in all my days has it been more appropriate to suggest an individual take this somewhat patronising advice. Let me give you a clue.... FCRM do not produce renewable energy! They are not engaged in the production of any energy, nor do they manage energy or distribute energy let alone sell energy.
It might be a good time for you to reassess your investment strategy as it is founded on a false premise.
They may have a lot to hide .
Why doesn't Fulcrum divulge what they are thinking?
I don't really see the need to take in private and wipe out the smaller investors when Bayford and Harwood can do this conversion, increase their shareholding from 58% (now) to perhaps 90% or more post conversion and raise a bit from smaller investors to boot to help capitalise the working capital.
Owning 90% or more of FCRM would be as good as 100% and without the need to stuff smaller investors. I do accept that they could delist however at that stage.....so our investment may become more illiquid...who knows?
Yep I do see that Pip56 ...indeed a lot of my bets go the same way and with similar shennannighans on AIM......some do work out and that gives me gross pleasure...and many don't....the play is the fun for me......I do believe in helping Karma along the way....! I look at the NAV but head the threat in today's RNS:- "The termination of the Amended Facility would likely result in little or no value for Shareholders. Accordingly, it is important that Shareholders vote in favour of all of the Resolutions so that Conversion may proceed and all funding options are available to the Board."
I hope no shares of mine will be taken as Liam Neeson would muse?
Turner & Harwood both fought over the company in an attempt to take it private. Their attempt failed because the company is domiciled offshore. Turner & Harwood then built up their shareholding to the extent that the Articles of Association were changed to allow them greater control without being forced to make a takeover, as per the usual rules. They have continued to consolidate their positions ever since and any future conversion will enhance their benefit to the point that the company is increasingly in their complete ownership. They are not only the majority share owners but increasingly the shareholders with an iron grip over its future - no one else can stand against them.
The decision of the company to withdraw from installing digital domestic meters is hardly a surprise. The original contract was to install meters for a utility company owned by Turner. Before this Fulcrum had no involvement in domestic meters at all. The contract was heavily biased in Turners favour and Fulcrum was taken to the cleaners. it stands as an example of how a majority shareholder holds sway and it was disastrous.
I have no axe to grind because I jumped ship when the dividend was cut and the sp was falling from 40p. The roles of Turner and Bayford were just beginning to come into play, and it coincided with less transparency over how the company were performing. I understand a contrarian position and why at 1p this is inviting. I wrote a year or so ago that the company needed to focus on what it does best - designing, building & installing power grids - if it does then it could certainly bounce back. However with the current set up as it is I can only see a Machiavellian plot to take it into voluntary administration and then buy it back for £1, with the debt wiped clean.
QuantumStar,
As per RNS Loan facility split between Bayford and Harwood....and both directors on our BOD which is why the RNS distinguishes between the two independent directors as opposed to Jonathon and Jeremy who clearly hold the purse strings..and most of the shares..maybe "Open Offer" rather than my "RI" statement would be better....soz.
Personally I feel relaxed here.....contra the trend of most posters.......I don't always go with the flow! Contrarian Investor at heart! works for me!
My understanding is that the interest is 20% p.a on money's drawn down..and 6% on the remainder not drawn down.
Only if by some miracle they pay down early is the other 20% levied so if all money was e.g. taken at once £11m @20% would be chargeable and if repaid the next day the whole 20% would be levied (in other words 11m @20%/365 plus 11m @20%....which is £2.2m and £6k...being one day's interest.
Their is therefore no incentive to repay early since you would pay the 20% of whatever repaid and then incur the 6% on the non-drawn down monies until Nov.23.
I therefore feel the conversion will be done....at the time they see potential turn around....and it will be at 0.5p
Just as I see it!
All you need to know about this company is looking right back at you. A 'Trading Statement' that is a rehash of an earlier RNS and which contains absolutely nothing about the performance of the company other than 'in line with expectations'. No statements about newly won contracts, money in the bank, income or turnover. Compare it with previous trading statements. Blink and you might miss the loan (from shareholders at a whopping 20% interest + 20% arrangement fee) has been extended.
So in context a company struggling has been loaded up with debt that it will not be able to pay off and the terms of which will send it into greater debt. Meanwhile the main shareholders are skimming 40% of the loan back into their pockets through preload arrangement fees and interest. The promise of conversion is a mirage.... the company is worthless.
I'm much in the same position as you QuantumStar. (Invested £1,000)
I only invested on the basis that they were trying to turn things round and exiting the smart meter market and concentrating on their key strengths on instalation etc. I think?
The concern seems to be that the two lenders will acquire FCRM on the cheap and force small shareholders to sell at next to nothing and therefore lose most or all of their investment.
Personally I only invested on the basis of a pure gamble in order to acquire a larger holding at 0.5p...and see where it goes. It's really only a small investment for me....I just have to decide how much I am prepared to invest in the Rights issue at 0.5p probably/maybe?