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.
some people need chill pills - is this a board for communists? anybody with sense likes to discuss the good, the bad and the ugly of their investment to know if it's time to say cherio or hello to some more shares. anybody that doesn't like should leave and get a private board and/or move to China. there's something wrong if you the filter botton doesn't satisfy your control for power.
Fernan10,
What are you doing if not critizing?
You don't have an ESG mandate that you need to adhere to in order to personally invest in Chariot. However, Financial institutions such as banks do. It's how the world is nowadays.
Either get onboard with their business as it is or maybe go and find a pure O&G play that's fully funded (because if they're not fully funded - and they have no ESG credentials - they will be limited in their ability to raise finance).
"It's the easiest thing in the world to armchair quarterback on how much better we think we would be at raising funds for this project."
Not, you are wrong. The easiest thing is to critizice someone who is giving their honest oppinion about what he/she thinks is the best way of treating shareholders.
4kandles,
Not sure how you keep a FR under wraps whilst you're sounding out the appetite (and price) for it.
Most financial institutions now have mandates that only allow them to invest in O&G companies that have ESG credentials.
It's the easiest thing in the world to armchair quarterback on how much better we think we would be at raising funds for this project.
Hi fernan,
75% of funds raised are for the anchois field project, so that’s value enhancing . I don’t fully understand the economic payback of the renewables , but project nour is going to be huge so happy to spend money on that and then bring in partner.
Jimmy
Fair enough Fernan. I take your point. So you would not have famred-down to raise funds I assume ? That, imho, would have been even more dilutive.
Perhaps the management view on the non-Anchois opportunities is "act now or miss the boat". Chariot &Total Eren seem to have a pipeline of opportunities. They may seem irrelevant to you but I am sure they are meaningful in the context of ESG and debt funding for Anchois.
Hi Ajilimon
Good questions.
The best course of action should have been :
1. If Anchois needs money to keep going ahead, Ok, let´s raise the US$ 15 mm to perform the FEED, complete the CPR, etc. In such a case, dilution should have been only 7%.
2. Use the US$ 4 mm of cash on hand at March 31 to pay G&A expenses for the next year.
3. Bring the CPR with the updated figures, including Anchois satellites and the rest of prospects in the Lixus license.
4. Forget about pursuing "new ventures", at the cost of diluting shareholders at such an early stage of Anchois. Wait for a higher share price before going after those "new ventures", in order to fund them with minimal dilution to shareholders.
For management, shareholders should be the source of money of last resort, always.
All in my humble oppinion, of course.
Regards
Hi Fernan,
I'd like to understand what action you think the compnay should have taken ? Would you have been against a smaller raise with all funds allocated to Anchois ?
The FR seems good to me. My views on CPR timing are on record. The FEED and other activity need to be funded. Would you have preferred we were diluted via farm-out ? What % of the asset should they have sold ? Price ?
Hi Jimmy.
What I was trying to say is that, instead of trying to get the maximum return out of of Anchois for current shareholders, management will likely provide us with a suboptimal yield from that project.
That´s because we are being diluted at such an early stage of Anchois, in order to raise money to pursue unknown "new ventures" and, worse than that, for no clear purpose at all.
Regards
4k, great post. ap has done well to get company back to where it is and he did it to point in 2010 - my only concern is that he doesn't close a deal when he should.
Fernan,
The heads of terms with the Sub Sea Alliance, who are performing the Feed and previously did the pre Feed , was that they will project manage the project and operate the field afterwards, which I agree with, as it’s best to leave this to the experts.
Jimmy
I'm a long term holder here, because I believe in the value of Anchois.
Regreatly, the project can be managed by itself. We need a management team.
Now I'm not so sure management will realize the full value of the project for us.
bb, to be fair the timing is questionable if you look at this from the surface and you can understand the mistrust based on previous history. short to medium term the buyers who got in will be looking to make a profit so i can see an early exit will present itself above current price soon - this will be the perfect opportunity for doubters to exit. at the moment, i have a foot in both camps. i'm not convinced jimmy has a grip on costs and the fact we are not getting enough coverage in more prominent journals does raise my alarms. yes, i accept plausible reasons and 1 rns can spike this and continue to hold on this basis and on the basis that the field is + 1tcf.
4k,
You can't chalk up Petra's failure solely to APs involvement. Petra had a string of problems that oscillated between economic and political crises. Diamond mining and South Africa are both highly unstable industries and countries, respectively. Have a look at this FT article to get a clearer insight into some of Petras problems: https://www.ft.com/content/54cc3c5e-5f37-11e8-9334-2218e7146b04
There seems to be a strong concensus that the 18p placing was great because it was undiscounted and oversubscribed. Can I point out 2 things regarding this
1. Just a few days prior the stock was trading in the 21p to 24p range before the SP dropped to 18p with the help of some massive sells which were noted on this messageboard. No TR1's have been seen. IMO, one has to be confident that this was normal trading activity in order to believe that 18p was a fair price for existing shareholders. You decide.
2. Given that the SP was >20% higher just a few days before, is it any surprise that the placing was oversubscribed? Oversubscribed = nice and cheap for insiders and cronies to buy-in? You decide.
Finally, there have been comments about how different (better) things are under AP and how it's great that he's putting his own cash in. Perhaps this is true. For those not familiar with Petra Diamonds I would advise folks to observe how shareholder value progressed between its 1997 IPO and when AP left in 2020. Sound management working for the benefit of shareholders? You decide.
I'm very long here but its important to be informed and question everything.
"They have used a highly profitable project to raise money from shareholders, without a clear purpose."
An alternative view is "They have used a highly profitable project to raise money from shareholders, with the clear aim of growing the overall value of the company to the benefit of all stakeholders."
The purpose is clear! 75% go to Anchois, for FEED etc. in order to reach gas sales agreements, FID and project finance. And 25% go to renewable projects like the green hydrogen project in Mauritania. How is this unclear?
This has to be the first time I see investors complain about an oversubscribed financing, done at market price and without warrants, that closed within hours.
"The truth is, we don't know how that additional 20% is going to be allocated to/for"
"We can safely assume that 75% of whatever the company ends up raising will go to Anchois."
That is exactly my point. They have used a highly profitable project to raise money from shareholders, without a clear purpose.
Regards
correction, 25.5% more. Keep forgetting how much more the market was willing/wanting to give them.
One would think some may be going into the mining projects with Total erin to potentially increase cash flow from that avenue. From memory we can buy in at up to 45% of those projects? maybe investing a little more there and bringing in more cash flow short term could delay a further fund raise in the near future. But to be clear, I would fully anticipate further fund raises as the Anchois projects develops.
Fernan... "Progress renewable power pipeline, strategic partnering and new venture opportunities - $5M"
The initial announced offering allocated $15M to Anchois and $5M to renewables. The extra $9M come from 1) $5M oversubscription, and 2) $4M open offer. We can safely assume that 75% of whatever the company ends up raising will go to Anchois. Rest assured mate.
Since Adonis has been acting CEO, Chariot has been a completely different company to that of 10 years ago.
Fernan10,
I think you're grabbing at straws to try and fit your narrative. The truth is, we don't know how that additional 20% is going to be allocated to/for. All we know is the market was desperate to give it to them ;)
They are raising US$ 29 mm in total. Only US$ 15 mm are invested in Anchois. As for G&A expenses, they already had US$ 4 mm at the end of March to pay for them.
So, the remaining US$ 14 mm being raised is not related to Anchois neither to pay for G&A expenses.
Regards