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.
Gwynwin
Hopefully so, as everything that went before has reportedly been cast into history. Alistair Muir who in my personal opinion appears to have done less to progress the Company than an previous CEO is now once again in charge. …
Whatever the future coal is the key !!
they have done that i would say that July is the start of something big.
only a few days away
Still feel Edenville will need to prove 3000 tonnes a month over a stated period of time, say three months rather than just a one off 3000 tonnes a month. I think that will come out over the next few months,I don't think we know the full story, there's a few more twists in my opinion.
GW - agreed, the only good news recently is untethering from Lind. The rest is canon fodder and is avoiding the real question which is the handover and relationship with ILTL: they were meant to be working out all the sales, I thought, leaving EDL to focus on other stuff.
T
Covid stopped our operations on site for just under 4months – we’ve been mining since the beginning of August, almost 11 months. Allegedly the bigger issue has been the handover to ILTL being delayed due to Covid. That was planned for 1 September 2020, then the 60days mobilisation was mentioned and we moved to 1 November, then a bit more delay due to work permits - now it's nearly July 2021....and we don't have a date at all.
ILTL were also meant to be an anchor tenant, purchasing 3,000t per month initially rising to 5,000t - where is that mentioned in yesterday’s RNS? Are ILTL getting ready to pull out? And what is “satisfactory performance” – I assume we know what the calorific value of our main asset is? Or aren’t we sure? Or is it a problem?
The real recent positive is getting rid of Lind and the CLF, albeit via yet another placing.
In reality since October 2017 we have achieved the square root of nothing in terms of building either a profitable business or shareholder value, while spending in the region of probably ÂŁ6m+ doing it.
The time for talking about orders (the 2018 RNSs are littered with orders – whatever happened to Riftcot and the coal offtake agreement for up to 75% of our output?), CPP (which currently has no funding and no build programme) etc is well passed - Alistair needs to deliver profitable operations and Q3 is absolutely crucial for us as a business.
Don’t mention the weather! lol
Just a point about contracts, pre the chaos caused by the pandemic, I remember Alister Muir, stating in one of the RNS's that EDL had a substantial order book which would have been a good start for ILTL to get cracking on, he said in the last RNS that he expected to fill the order book. No doubt those that walk around with a rain cloud as big as a dustbin lid on top of their head will rubbish that.
esquimo
I agree, and your point that stands out the most to me is: “Regardless what people think the pandemic caused a major disruption to EDL”
We don’t know what would have happened if covid hadn’t happened or where we might be now, but probably further forward.
I am somewhat surprised that with regard to Tony Buckingham and other parties as mentioned in the RNS that from a discussion perspective that they are not considerably more advanced, or have a clearer idea of their aim.
I really wonder what anybody expects them to achieve with c. a million quid?
Coal as always is/will be key imo
Hi JEZZAC, you will get no arguments from me re the run of misleading RNS's in 17/18 which lead EDL at the mercy of anybody prepared to lend them any form of finance which put EDL's Mcap so low they could have been bought out of the back pockets of some people.
Presently, the addition of the new investors, the talk of diversifying, the latest RNS I see as a positive. it would seem that the request for
EDL to look at supplying coal to an onsite CPP(which some have said would not happen) and the contracts that they are chasing makes this completely different, of course I can hear the shouting ''we've been here before'' but as I've said before the recent investors are not mugs and I do not believe that they are in
EDL for a quick buck or to lose money.
Regardless what people think the pandemic caused a major disruption to EDL.
Just a point on the CPP which needs to be in operation fairly quickly, no mention of the Chinese.
We will need some good news after the results methinks. hopefully by the end of July we will know where we are heading, we will see if the latest RNS is as some claim ''just the same old story''.
Hi Esquimo
My point being that you said "All the old RNS's can be quoted but do they have any bearing on the current situation?"
All past RNAs have a bearing on the current situation as they have always overpromised and under delivered at every turn. If they didnt have any bearing then the SP would be much higher than what it is today and they would be selling north of 10k tonnes per month. If i was a new investor i would look at all past RNAs and gauge it against actual deliveries and what was quoted and i would see EDL as failed at nearly every level for the last 5 years. This need to change quickly otherwise this will just be another AIM lifestyle company where the BOD pick up a nice cheque each month and investors get screwed. Lets see what Q3 brings. J
Essentially combine NvS interview with today's RNS and you have it!!!!
I believe they want to prove they can generate 3,000 tonnes a month (over a number of months) and sign as many contracts as they can.
At the point when the handover is reviewed Edenville will be hoping Edenville's mining operations is very attractive. That's why I think there's now a big push for coal contracts. More contracts more likely they are to get to 3000 tonnes of coal. At that point a decision will be made at the review
1) they will hand over the mine to ITIL, keep the mining licence and take a percentage.
2) sell the entire setup lock stock and barrel (or bucket of coal!!)
They are looking at acquisitions in the RNS today they stated that. I'm guessing it will depend on what ÂŁÂŁ they need for acquisition and/or how much they can get for Edenville. There is of course the possibility of another placing for the acquisition.
SoS, what in the last RNS makes you think they are not interested in coal????
The RNS was about coal, it has always been about coal.
They've been asked about supplying a CPP project,
cement works local and previously international cement works, and you claim they want to be out of coal??????
Pi - it simply proves it's just another excuse from our BoD.
3.14 re 3000 tonnes, agreed, I did say if things have changed we should have been told of those changes,
GW no arguments on the track record.
Green wolf this proves it's not the work permits if they need to be up to 3000 ton a month before hand over??
Esquimo again if they are going to feed international customers that they get contracts for why have they got to wait till edl get local orders for 3000 ton ?? It just dont add up.
Sausage thanks.
esquimo - my feeling is it isn't us thinking it's not a good deal, it's more ILTL getting jittery that if we can't get to at least a decent sales output (3,000t per month plus) then they're potentially going to struggle too.
I simply don't believe that Covid / work permits etc etc have had this much impact on the handover. The reference to the 3,000t is the second bit of information that they seem to have innocently left out - the other being about the 60day mobilisation period.
Let's hope July is transformational, but we don't exactly have a glowing track record as a company on this.
3.14, My understanding with the ILTL not (ITLT) agreement was that ILTL would import the skilled personnel capable of running the mine, to feed international contracts whilst EDL pursued local contracts, the production targets were well in excess of 10k tonnes pm. so EDL would take a %age of whatever was produced, the statement being a profit on every tonne.
If that has changed then it should be made public.
EDL obviously thought that was a good deal, how things have changed since then we have yet to find out.
Personally I don't think the latest RNS is the same as the historic failed promises, the likes of RAB etc. would not put their money into the hands of incompetent people, they put their cash in for a good reason not on a whim.
Pi,
Because they don't want to be in coal!!! They have implicitly stated this in the NvS interview. Coal is not the future for many reasons. Even in today's RNS they said "On the acquisition front we have recently spent time with our new strategic investor, Tony Buckingham, and we look forward to exploring opportunities with him and his team, alongside those provided by other parties."
I've said it before I'll say it again, they are looking to buy a small company with extraction licences in place and reverse into them, change the name and we will be off. The RNS states "On the acquisition front we"
The question that then comes to me is say for arguments sake edl are shifting 5000 tons a month and making a profit, why would they then hand it over to just get a small commission on the sales?
Jezzac, this RNS is no different, that in itself is the question, you can't say that it is no different until the time comes when it can be proven. You can assume but you can't verify what you say, that is why I say I can't answer it until it can be proven that you are right or wrong.
We have the whole of July to go.
In a world where everything changes so quickly, it's nice to keep hold of some traditions, surely...
LOL.
Jezzac - "RNSs have always over promised and underdelivered and todays RNS is no different"
This is AIM - were you expecting any different?!!
Seriously, you are spot on - we've all banged on about it's time to deliver over the last few years. And we're still saying it.