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.
Yes- currently trading 30 but havn’t tested in size!
Sanderling
I see your point.. but more often that not the share price declines to any RI price anyway for one reason or another
...although it could have been worse...they could have directed private investor holders to Primary Bid and made them buy there...ugh !
Pokerchips, the dilution itself is not so much the issue- many retail shareholders may not have the resources to put more cash in. The issue for me is the forced dilution- ie disapplying pre-emption rights in Resolution 1
I am personally convinced that the money will be used productively and feel that I should have the right to buy enough shares to maintain my % at the placing price rather than have some existing non- holders come in and take that upside away from me.
Lottie, Yes a rights issue would be a bit messy but could be underwritten with institutions taking a fee and picking up any residual from existing s/h demand
There is clearly some debate on this and am personally not fully convinced about management—but my view is that INFA has exciting potential However, if we continue down this cycle of dilutive placings, the benefits will fall to management, institutions and favoured shareholders with medium/ long term retail shareholders getting continually left out .
Plus was interesting to see the sp dip in the run up to May 4– feels like insider selling
The only way to break this is to vote against— There is clearly demand so the funding will get done either way despite the company warning.
JW stated at one point FID was not dependent on the ML, potentially phased .. and then as I recall suggested they were hanging on for government grants.
Avyererdowt
ML news would be positive as it would take away any certainty on that issue of course...SP reaction depends on whether any FID is announced with it....that point is the detail
Of course ...there is the the grant of the Marine Licence itself
..but... then there is the Financial Investment Decision with equity partners ...
but "On award of the Marine Licence the Project will be construction-ready"
I would imagine there would be 1 RNS detailing the licence ..and a further one detailing the completion of the FID with equity partners once confirmed ..a lot has been said over different time lines
" potential new funding opportunities available for the Project that could have significant long term upside gains for the Company, amongst which is the potential to retain a much larger project equity stake than originally envisaged. "
I have to admit I am a little nervous as to what "exactly" that FID is going to be and how it would effect "equity" ...but ..at the end of the day..it is another investment in a project to bring future value .....
I think there was some discussion on that issue of the FID detail 2-3 weeks ago
How is maiden revenues insignificant? Did you read the part of the RNS where they expect cash break-even this year????? If you don't trust the company sell up and move on. But I'm not selling just when it's getting good, that's for certain.
Razorshultz.
Maiden revenues have been insignificant which is why we find ourselves, yet again, cap in hand. As for billions in potential orders, please, that is just business speak. Anyone can look at demand pipelines and state they are in the running. Getting ships which mostly operate out of your home port to agree to service contracts is not earth shattering. We need a major contract.
You think that the competitors ability to under cut is of no importance because we have a big yard. That is exactly why INFA bought these assets out of liquidation in the first place. The EU may well help the large shipbuilding sector, that will not help.
The BOD stated back in September, half way into Covid that the ML was only weeks away so they had every knowledge of the situation.
I am a realist. The cash burn was high when I bought into INFA. Since then, they have continued to spend shareholders money without a solid contract. Yes, covid has not helped but I can assure you other European and Asian yards have announced billions of dollars of new build contracts.
"What has the cost of borrowing got to do with the charges for arranging a placing? "
Well if you want £10m and you don't want a placing..then ..you either go and get a loan or maybe issue bonds ...
but..of course you need to compare the costs of doing each.....whatever you do..it is going to cost you ..
Avyererdowt
hi..with respect..you cant "measure" things like that just on the share price change over a couple of days....
right now..all you need to do..is decide whether the money being raised is going to be productive and bring share price enhancement on the 30p paid for them....in 6-12 months it might be 45p ..a 50% return
The money in all fairness is going to give the finances needed for companies to come and do business...it says..ok..these guys aren't going to go bankrupt tomorrow...they have working capital to use... without proper working capital they haven't got a chance ...it is like investing in tools for a carpenter..without them he is useless no matter what skills he might have
without the working capital...it is hopeless.... you need working capital to spend on a contract before any revenue comes in....and Saipem are not going to give more contracts without a better working capital set up... more contracts are "currently in advanced negotiations.".....dependent on what do you think ??
Dilution.... well..you might right now own ...say 20,000 shares ...0.024% of the company....dilution would bring that to just over 0.0125% .... our crumb is a bit smaller...BUT ..it would be a smaller crumb in a bigger,stronger company......which actually would turn out quite probably much better than a bigger crumb in a weaker, poorer company.
Depends how you see it all ..but you certainly cannot judge anything on a 2 day share price change
IMO
Pokerchips,
What has the cost of borrowing got to do with the charges for arranging a placing?
That's wrong though. They haven't "failed". What they did instead was generate maiden revenues and create a pipeline of billions of potential contract work. We all thought the ML was weeks away, then covid happened. So it's not just the BOD that were incorrect, unsuspecting things happened.
Who cares what German yards and the EU are doing? We have 2 of the 4 biggest docks of any shipyard in the EU. If you sell at a loss that's on you. You seem to have a number of misunderstandings about the business.
To answer two questions.
1) £700K is par for the course. Rightly or wrongly but Investment Banking is a very expensive business to run. London rules the waves and long may it continue.
2) Why would I be looking at July as my time frame. By then, we should know the outcome of the LOI which, if successful, would be transformative. If it does not happen, it would imply H and W may never be a commercial shipbuilder again, especially as German yards are calling on the EU to aid yards suffering against the highly government backed builders in the Far East. Additionally, if the ML is not agreed by then, in my opinion, it never will.
The main reason to invest was a belief that the BOD were competent. Having stated several times that the ML was only weeks away, they have by their incorrect appraisal, drained my confidence.
Yes, they have used shareholders money to buy bankrupt businesses, something a four year old could do. To justify £1m payouts, turning those worthless assets into going concerns is the real test. As yet, they have, maybe due to covid, failed. The Saipem order was already negotiated with the previous owners so not a new contract. They still have not delivered one decent contract.
So by July, I will have my answer. Either I will be selling at 12p or happy at £1....
" the £700k costs "
how much do you think it costs to borrow £10 million for say 3 or 5 years ?
Lottie why would you not invest for longer? I have bad news for you, 18 months really isn't a long time to hold a share and watch a company develop itself. Whenever I invest in something I consider whether the company will be more profitable in 5 years than it is today, and the answer for INFA is a resounding yes. We have gone from a company trying to build a salt cavern to making maiden revenues after some very significant acquisitions of 4 marine engineering factories, tendering for contracts, planning to be a big part of the Brexit shipbuilding surge.
How anyone can be unimpressed with this is beyond me.
Lottie123,
Thank you for your insight into the complexity and cost of a rights issue.
Can you comment on the £700k costs incurred in arranging the latest placing?
I completely understand your argument for a fully fledged Rights Issue to raise the extra cash. Having been a jobber on the old Stock Exchange floor during many such issues, I can tell you they are a very complex and expensive operation. Yes, it would protect existing shareholders from dilution as they could either participate or, in the event of the shares trading at a premium to the Rights offering, sell the Rights. The shares would need to be traded, for a short period, in Cum and Ex format as well as the underlying shares. Believe me, it is awkward and costly for the company (INFA)
Once again, I agree with your frustration but this is really the only way. If you went for a deep discounted placing issue, solely for existing shareholders, the chances are it would immediately trade below that price and many would be scared off taking up the offer. This would then require a subsequent placing, invariably at a discount to the original price.
Let's all grin and bear it one more time. If nothing is forthcoming by July, my 18 month journey will come to an end, probably in loss but that is the risk we take.
Poker you missed the point- I am not complaining about the fundraise I am complaining about the dilution.
Tango, I am not convinced on that- HL for example is partly retail
" Unfortunately the impact of dilutive placings like this is to expropriate (steal)that growth from ordinary shareholders with favoured shareholders and Directors allowed to buy in to that growth at a discount"
buy NOW ..in the market at 30p !!!
what on earth are you investing in a company for growth ...and then complaining because they raise money ...for...growth !!!!
Sanderling, if you look at the voting power of the II's it would not make a difference which way PI's voted DYOR.
PJT, My agenda is simply not to be continually forcibly diluted!!
Morgz, the funding will be done if we vote no- just in a more equitable way
Sanderling, I must confess that I am always very suspicious of "holders" who create an account in order to post a negative comment at an "opportunistic" moment. Why would anyone who professes to have spent six months building up a holding suddenly choose to post such a provocative header especially? I believe I already know the answer or = more importantly - your agenda. I would suggest that others here do not feed the thread.
Absolutely do not vote against. Whatever your opinion on the dilution, if you are invested why would look to actively harm the future growth prospects of the company? There is no way forward without the funding, you may as well just sell your shares if you are going to vote against.