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.
Well, that was disappointing.
My only underperforming stock.
The market certainly didn't appreciate that news today.
Maybe let's look to the next few months.
Go back to the AH interview on the 1st of October. He mentions a debt instrument to fund our BFS, estimated at around $13m (subject to market appetite).
Anyone have any ideas on how that's going to work out?
I must be missing something. The sole reason for NRR is to generate cash flow for KM. That is happening. Why would you use the cash for NRR when/if you already have it earmarked for KM? If others paying more results in faster cash flow at zero cost surely it is a win win? If your objective was NRR then not so but it is KM. I wouldn’t have thrown more money into NRR either!
But it only impacts on AMC’s holding in NRR. It makes no difference to the holding in KM. additionally it should result in faster cash flow from NRR. The fact his Mrs sold 5k worth of shares is small beer. I actually don’t see a negative here. I see a positive despite the market reaction. It could be argued that he expected the sp to rise which is why he did the sale prior to the news.
thank you
Hi sparticus,
Lets try again.....
The new equity didn't just dilute AMC's equity. It dilutes the equity of all the original shareholders.
So the $10m does not just represent 5.6% approx of AMC's equity .
That is where you logic is falling down.
Again I refer you to Rovers post for a good calculation.
I take your points, Mike, but it feels a little like a storm in a teacup to me that's all.
Good to see support held up just below 2p.
My take on this issue.
Our investment in NRR had a loan note attached providing 14% return. This 14% I understand is normal interest on our loan. It could be converted to an equity share of 19% of the then company share value but at a additional cost. This has a time constraint of 3years. If in the interim another party invests $10m I cannot see how the loan note arrangement changes. A loan is a loan. But to convert to the 19% equity the equity value is greater by $10m so the contribution to convert must be greater. Or for the same anticipated additional payment the equity amount reduces to the 13.43% (was it?) figure. Can someone who fully understands these issues state how it is. Not sure if it's just maths which I'm OK with or business finance which I'm less OK with.
Lol Henners, possibly. Yet, if you can't see my point or have a different take on things then great.
British Mike, Are you really getting hot under the collar for a measly £5k? The guy/his wife wants to sell to raise a few quid. Why not? Shares in kind have to be sold to raise cash. It's no biggy at all. PATIENCE please.
I am honestly confused not trying to be clever glandore, somehow we are wildly apart on our calcs so i am thinking its me and want to be corrected
my logic is obviously to simple, and sometimes you cant see the wood for the trees so to speak
but i cant see where the £10 million payment doesnt equate to our 5.6% ? lost equity and then calculations so on from there
sorry for being stupid
I am honestly confused not trying to be clever glandore, somehow we are wildly apart on our calcs so i am thinking its me and want to be corrected
my logic is obviously to simple, and sometimes you cant see the wood for the trees so to speak
but i cant see where the £10 million payment doesnt equate to our 5.6% ? lost equity and then calculations so on from there
sorry for being stupid
Ok - not my job to teach you maths.
glandore
yes the 19% was our original equity, who ever put in 10mill which took us down to 13.4%
so how ever you say it the 10million was paid equal to our 5.6% you still havent convinced me otherwise ?
Allthatglitters - More to it than that.
Firstly, why sell yesterday when this news hit today - why not sell today, after the news. So it means we have lost respect and integrity towards Mr. Habib as in this game it's all about trust. Clearly this was leaked to his wife.
Secondly, the iron ore stockpile is being shipped more rapidly (the ramping up by larger investors in NRR today) which means Phase 2 CAPEX is likely required earlier.
Thirdly, what's stopping the big boys diluting us further? I appreciate dilution can occur, yet this is still fresh off the deal. I wonder if AMC knew this was likely to happen or if they've been f'd over and not knew it was coming? Either way, once this was known, Mr. Habib's wife offloads £5k.
Why not just sell today so it wasn't suspicious. We need to be able to trust the BoD.
Also, just because people like me are moaning - it doesn't mean we are selling off. The SP has dropped, as it always does with less than positive news. The MM's will have a field day rising and dropping this stock over the coming weeks to TEO.
sparticus,
the 19% related to the original equity.
the 13.4% relates to a different number - the original equity +$10m.
therefore you cannot just subtract one % from another.
Rover's calculation is correct.
please re check glandore ?
So the investment is worth £600k less and his missus sold £5k and we dropped 15%? Yeah, that's logical. Well done, market.
rover not sure what your trying to say ? wheres the 24.57 million from you say M/cap
the m/cap of a company at any given time does not tell you the true value of a company hardly ever
i thought it was simple they put in 10million we lost 5.6% so f...how you make the remaining 13.4% less than half the value
of the 5.6%
my rough calcs your 5x out under estimating
i might be being daft fine ill put it down to drugs and i appologise
Consider yourself slapped.
See Rover's correct calculation below....
sorry £4.67 million semantics anyway
glandore think your missing it AMC may have paid £3.5 million ish for there share, but that share/value purchased has just had a £ actual value calculated for it imop
19% -13.4% = 5.6%
£10 million =5.6%
£10 million divided by 5.6% = x 13.4% = £23.92 million please slap me if i am wrong
Hi Tuckman,
"yes I just hope our board are strong enough to see the long term potential over the short term cash gains "
Despite my occassional misgivings with the board, in this instance, it is not the BoD that concerns me as you know, it's the fickle shorttermist shareholders that could potentially ruin an excellent opportunity, that are of concern.
Let's hope there are not too many of those and as this morning proves a few seem already running for the hills - good!etank
My calls
$4.67m = 19% = mcap $24.57m
Plus $10m
$34.57m.
13.34% is $4.61m
Crude calc as time has gone by.