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.
Angs has already missed Aany chance of May production. Fact. George was as per usual over-optimistic and just plain wrong.
If achieved, 1.5 million therms at current June pricing of 148p per therm would deliver £2.22 million. Fact. George was wildly exaggerating.
The above two statements remain true, no matter how often you try to juslead, Stockbob.
A truly pathetic ramp attempt, as is usual from you.
Couple more points about the warrants:
1/ they expire after 2 years from issue (late January 2021 for the bulk of them, from memory:
2/ they are not negotiable, ie a warrant holder can only realise any gains on them by exercising them and then selling all or part of the shares thereby acquired.
WG818,
As I said, my guide to cash flow is the revised CPR of 26/10/21.
The share price will determine whether the warrants are exercised or not but, given they are exercisable between 1.20p and 1.50p and the share price is currently slap bang in the middle of that range, there is very little point in discussing an eventual placing without taking account of the warrants.
Ocelot
So it sounds like you agree with my calculations then. Your answer to the problem is that the warrants will be exercised? It’s hardly likely that all the warrant holders will do that though! And far more unlikely that any of them would exercise the ones above 1.2. Why would they possibly do that?
Warrants are a kind of deferred placing, where:
1/ the market determines if the exercise price is attained;
2/ the individual warrant holder determines when to exercise his/her warrant.
TheManual,
Warrants are RNS'd when they are exercised. Their exercise increases the number of shares issued by the company which has to be communicated to the market.
Stockbob, again you seize upon George's massive over-exaggeration and use it in an attempt to deceive.
George claimed on March 10th as follows:-
"The focus is now away from skid delivery to installation with the aim of having the site ready for commissioning during April and producing during May."
(Well, he's clearly already missed that timescale estimate).
"In fact, gross production, of which we have a 51% share, solely from the existing wells and which is wholly unhedged for the month of June, is expected to yield 1.5 million therms or gross revenue of £7.2 million at today's forward price for that month alone."
This was never anywhere near true, even when he said it on March 10th - at that point June gas was priced at around 290p a therm and rapidly falling, and CATEGORICALLY NOT at the 480p per therm that would have been needed to make George's bizarrely inaccurate claim true..
Back to reality (apparently not something that George is used to).. Even presuming he can start production on June 1st (doubtful) and get 1.5 million therms out in the month, yes it all would be unhedged...
...but June gas is priced at 148p per them, so that's £2.22 million of revenue, if he can produce that much and categorically NOT what his Lordship was wildly exaggerating just a couple of months back.
Feel free to fact check any and all info above. It's all freely available and all in the public domain.
given we are FAST approaching first gas. (not "first", mind was elsewhere!)
WG818,
For cash flow forecasts, I refer to the revised CPR of 26/10/21 which reflects ANGS's debt commitments.
Re an eventual further placing, will leave that for others to worry about.
As I've said, there's about £2m of warrants to be exercised between 1.20p and 1.50p.
And, in truth, don't believe the share price will remain grossly undervalued for much longer, given we are first approaching first gas.
Garwool1
For that statement to become true they have the slight problem of being able to afford, and drilling a successful sidetrack. The last 9 attempts failed!
March 22 Final results.
The Company also hedged approximately 50% of the Company's and its partners' share of future gas sales, estimated under a conservative projection, for three years beginning in July 2022. The average achieved price under the Hedge, including all fees, costs and charges is 43 pence per therm. Since entering into the Hedge agreements we have seen a significant increase in gas prices. As previously announced, the Hedged limits were set at 50% of our estimated gas production leaving the company with enough headroom to comfortably meet the requirements under the Hedge whilst still enjoying unhedged production.
Well they are only a few posts down. I’ll give you a couple of minutes to read the post. I will be interested to see if you agree!
Skimmed over this morning's posts, noticed the subject of a placing had been raised again, responded to that.
Sorry, WG818, I haven't looked at them.
So I take it you agree with my calculations then Ocelot?
There are about £2m of warrants to be exercised between 1.20p and 1.50p.
The share share price is currently exactly at the mid-point of that range.
And that’s of course without the cost to re-perf at Brockham as Gideons…sorry TheManual points out!
That should be CPR.
It’s actually quite easy to work out when you actually read the October CPR and the 14th March Final results.
They have zero income.
The cash burn without Saltfleetby is £250k a month.
The COR said they were £500k over the £12 million that the final results tell us they have taken in full.
They have since issued an RNS telling us that costs had risen another 10%. They are 3 months late on the projected timescale for the build. The COR tells us they must keep a minimum cash pile in the account. The minimum loan payment plus 3 months interest payments (at a guess around £2 million).
The 3 recent placing will be all but gone in general admin costs and the overrun.
The only way they were going to avoid a raise was to get that pie in the sky £7 mill odd GL mentioned from unhedged June production. That figure is around 2/3 out now, and that’s if they get a full month! They won’t. A couple of weeks at best and probably not even that imho.
Less than £2.5 million unhedged production in June and a raise is nailed on imho.
As has been repeatedly said, the sidetrack - if successful and if doubling production and if kicking in by Oct 1st at the latest - would be literally transformational.
At current gas pricing, it would change ANGS's share of gross revenue from the field over the three year hedge period from c £12 million over those three years to c. £55 million over the same period.
This is a very digital situation. It's all about the sidetrack being successful - and that is every bit as vital as it would be transformational.
Fair points.
I personally don’t think another placing will materialise in the next 2/3 months.
Even if it did, and let say it was to cover the drill and provided it was not a significant discount, then I think it will be well received by the market.
The side track, if it provides what is forecasted, will add a lot of money to the monthly pot, even if a partial part of the gas is required to cover the hedge.
With the future prices significantly higher, then any extra gas will paid at a premium.
wg is still crying over (allegedly)losing a bit of cash.
she is a failed mug punter
who is a failed deramper
who is now is failing to save other mug punters(in her humble opinion)
hell hath no fury like a woman scorned as they say
so based on these numbers how beneficial will the sidetrack be if and a big if it also produces at 1.5 mill therms per month, is this volume also shackled by a hedge and how does it all stack up to the ROI of the project against the current market cap.
just asking for a friend
Let me try to help you further, RT.
The calculation is ever so simple. It's:-
(the amount hedged that month x the fixed hedge price for that month) + (any remaining unhedged amount that month x the future gas price for that month).
Future gas pricing is publicly available for all to check at https://www.barchart.com/futures/quotes/NF*0/futures-prices
So, June. That's (0 x 0) + (1,500,000 x 148p) = £2.220 million gross revenue to be shared between ANGS and SEL.
And July. That's (1,125,000 x 41.4p) + (375,000 x 167p) = £1.092 million gross revenue to be shared between ANGS and SEL..
I'll even do October for you. That's (1,750,000 x 52.05p) + (minus 250,000 x 214p) = £376k gross revenue to be shared between ANGS and SEL..
If you're incapable of working the above out for yourself, then perhaps it's little wonder that you were laughably a fawning acolyte of one of LSE's most obvious rampers for so long, hanging on his every deceptive word.