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.
Is that a bite then mate?
BBN
That seems strangely selective. Why not also consider the result for shareholders while you’re there?
@Rosannan With all due respect there is no merit in comparing previous unrelated strategic reviews and their affect on valuations with AMER and attempting to establish a direction. None of them from what I can see even received an initial offer.
Each situation is unique as I indicated in my earlier post. Hence why I only focused (fairly loosely) on the average timescales it takes to review a public listed AIM company.
You are entitled to go in any direction you wish but in my view it is energy wasted.
Ross any chance you can post nethin useful or fact driven (& ofc doesn't mention your laughable valuation formula of double opening SP which always = 24p no matter what hard facts are presented against it) like a broken record on repeat spouting garbage bbllaahha blahhh blahhh 24p 24p 24p, I'm sure ill be dreaming 24p before this process is done.
NOT A SINGLE NEW AJENDA ITEM FROM ROSS SINCE HIS WELCOME RETURN TO THE FORUM ON THE VERY DAY THE COMPANY PUTS ITSELF UP FOR SALE.
P.S stop recommending your own posts with your other account as well, it looks silly.
Looking more closely at the Takeover rules I see that my thought process from earlier cannot be entirely right.
Even though M&P never made a formal approach their communication to the BOD that they were considering a possible offer was enough to trigger the Takeover process and would have required them to make a Put Up or Shut Up offer within 28 days of the initial announcement.
The commencement of a formal sales process by the AMER BOD interrupted this process and means that the Put Up or Shut Up rule (28 days) has been removed from the equation.
However, an announcement is required "when a firm intention to make an offer is notified to the board of the Target by or
on behalf of the Bidder (Rule 2.2(a))."
Furthermore, an announcement is also required when "the Target is the subject of rumour and speculation or there is an untoward movement in its share price and there is reason to believe the Bidder's actions have caused this"
"The financial advisers involved in the takeover offer will closely monitor both the Target's share price and sources of information relating to offers (such as newspapers and 6 newswires). The Panel must be consulted whenever there is a significant movement in share price over the relevant period or rumour and speculation about the possibility of an
offer, so that it can determine whether an announcement should be made."
So whilst the negotiations will remain behind closed doors, what each bidder cannot do is avoid a firm offer being made public. Therefore, the process has the potential to unfold far more openly. It will be interesting to see how that plays out in reality.
As it stands until there is a firm offer there is no deadline and the strategic review can in theory go on indefinitely.
file:///C:/Users/KRISTL/Downloads/Guide_to_UK_Takeovers.pdf
BBN
Just looking at the first couple though:
Netscientific seems to have gone from nearly 30p to sub-10p over the relevant period
MySale seems to have gone from nearly 7p to around 3p over the relevant period
Can you find one that was a winner?
Whatever the deal I hope its agreed in $ dollars & it gets paid/converted post 31st October.
Last thing I want is my full investment dropped into my share account as £ pounds on the 30th October.
lol what a nightmare
At some stage quite shortly, they will set a date.
In terms of division, I doubt if the OBA can be split off Platinillo, since it is on that block, as are all the interconnecting pipes .
Oxy may not worry about Plat/OBA going to someone else, as they have their agreement, but given their interest in Put 8, it seems that any bid from them will be for the core, Put 8 balance, Plat/OBA and the other 4 blocks (plus probably our 60% of PUT 12 and Put 14)
Some of the other scattered blocks might be separated, but hard to see any sense in splitting up the contiguous blocks, so carefully put together. Apart from anything else, the interpretation of the basin is easier as a single entity and can make the difference between success and failure.
CPO-5 is so valuable in its own right that is not much short of 50% of the overall value: separation of this obviously enables the smaller (and often more bullish entities) to participate in the bidding process. Using CD's analogy, few can afford the farm, but every man and his dog can bid for a shed.
Even if the process could be shortened why on earth would we want to.
Indico -2 - Spud/Drill/Results - all good chance to uplift Valuation by a large margin.
Brexit - a 20% devaluation of the £ could be worth tonnes to all parties in this process (& allow a more generous offer) ie subject to Brexit a deal could be agreed, then await the outcome & adjust the sale price accordingly (I mean 20% is the difference between 35p & 42p - carn't be ignored all on the 31st October ( assuming we havent devalued before that date))
So not unreasonable to think mid to late September/October would see the conclusion of this process and whatever it might bring, but not out of the question to be still going approaching Xmas.
@Rossannan I haven't gone that far with it and do not think it would be of worth. Each process ran completely different to one another. each company was is a different position in terms of stability, stress, valuation to NPV etc etc. So it wouldn't for me add anything.
I merely wished to establish a rough expected timeline for the strategic review so that I can appreciate that within the context of where we are. It does look to me more than possible that all of the offers and counter offers will take place behind closed doors and it is the conclusion that we will see, be it to our exact liking or not.
BigBiteNow
That is interesting research. What were the share price outcomes (share price immediately prior to FSP announcement versus share price at conclusion of FSP)?
After conducting a search of AIM companies that have completed similar strategic reviews and sale processes, I have thus far found 5 examples.
Company name - Strategic review start - Strategic review announcement - Time period
1. Netscientific - 26.11.2018 - 15.02.2019 - 2.5 months
2. MySale - 24.06.2019 - 20.08.2019 - 2 months
3. Realm Therapeutics - 29.11.2018 - 15.02.2019 - 2.5 months
4. EKF - 02.04.2015 - 18.08.2015 - 4.5 months
5. Frenkel Topping Group - 03.04.2017 - 27.06.2017 - 3 months
The comparison isn't perfect and the circumstances certainly cannot be declared as being the same, although there is some evidence of discussions with potential suitors. What is immediately clear is that the shortest time frame was 2 months and something up to 2.5 months certainly isn't uncommon.
AMER announced their strategic review on 19th July, so we are just 1 month into a process that is demonstrated as taking normally at least twice that time period.
It will be interesting how that times itself with the Indico 2 spud and drill result because from what I have read of the other strategic reviews, be they a limited list, the end of the review tends to deliver the result of how things will move forward.
One sizeable caveat is that AMER has declared more than one suitor that may or may not want parts or all of the business, which makes it more complicated.
The Frenkel Topping example was similar and their process took 3 months and ended with them accepting none of the offers put forward, although from what I have read of their review they look to have entered into the formal sale process in order to control the strategic review process and were not actually looking to sell out. AMER is clearly very different and look to be at the end of the line.
Still it sits as an example of how long a process can last when several potential suitors are involved. It also demonstrates that the conclusion of the review could signal the end of the process and deliver an offer(s) and recommendation from the BOD. Who knows? But for me another month or two should be allowed for before any anxiety over updates kicks in for sure.