The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen 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.
Agreed that no-one trust the Chinese
I agree Daz, and feel its been the case for a while. Its no bad thing as IMO is keeps day traders at bay which again IMO is a good thing for any other than those looking to exit on spike and wash their hands of it.
GLALTH
Well the LIT etf is northward bound so perhaps we might be soon too?
https://www.barchart.com/etfs-funds/quotes/LIT/technical-chart?plot=BAR&volume=0&data=DO&density=ML&pricesOn=1&asPctChange=0&logscale=0&sym=LIT&grid=1&height=210&studyheight=100
I agree that's what he said therefore my comments in the thread above indicate why this is less than desirable.
My original post does not contradict this or our understanding of KOD current situation and strategy. The fallout of an SC decision to not fund (about which we have no current concrete information beyond BA anecdotal indication to various interviewers that SC have an appetite to fund us) would be significant to the cash burn position required to attract alternative funding.
In the meantime our position remains MLA>>OTA>>Funding
GLALTH
Crk, he said an option in case sc withdraw. Lithium market is still run through contracts. BA recently confirmed SC is still backing production. Unless we have an attack kind off Trump claiming back africa. This of course will be fun.
ARahim, I'm sure at recent BA interview that BA intimated that traditional funding would still be an option so I'm going to answer your question with - "according to BA"
Me using your "The strategy here" thread to collate some of my thoughts which if you actually read my post actually reinforces your point in this thread should cause you no great concern unless you feel it is negative of me in some wider sense.
To mix my metaphors it seems by collating my thoughts to "put a stake in the ground" I've somehow managed to "shoot myself in the foot".....
Have a great day.
Who said we have a second option but sc. This is what we were singing for more than a year now.
This is what ba was following since sc finance. It is just some ******ed who being busy analysing numers.
My two cents:
1. I don't think anyone is knocking on the door to buy KOD outright.
2. A risk is that in the eyes of institutional investors that world Li demand can be met by existing players in the market. This reduces likely funding options to SC who have according to BA expressed interest in funding KOD to production. Institutional investors will stay away until a better DFS, JORC, LOM is show which = more drilling which = more cash burn of cash KOD don't have so it looks SC funded or bust to me at thi stage.
3. IF SC has access to sufficient capital AND spod quality from Buogouni is matched to Ruifu (whom SC wish to supply and (which bulk sample work to date indicates is the case) conversion then its a question of whether Ruifu have an alternative suitable supply identified which would influence product price and hence OTA and hence NPV. This will unfold as OTA is signed and released as RNS.
for the reasons above I maintain that only SC funding will move us forward as it removes the need for further expensive work to expand JORC, LOM and produce DFS for traditional funding sources which are not yet convinced there is inadequate spod supply in place. So SC funded or not at all I think.
4. IF SC have capital AND IF SC are confident their immediate supply needs are met THEN they may take the view that any profit during the first few years of production may be used to drill further, expand JORC and produce updated IRR calcs and better NPV as they go along. With a large stake and a board presence they will have influence in this regard.
This makes most sense to me as they have the opportunity to make money from supply chain via OTA and build share valve through resource expansion which gives them the opportunity to sell a chunk at such time as the financials support more traditional funding entities. This would be a few years down the road at which point the value to product will be better understood as EV and storage uptake increases.
Just a few thoughts.
Other than that our situation remains unchanged.
Bib, direct your concerns to ba or minister of mines, they are stating the facts not me. I see you are backed by few traders now.
Is get ota signed, get finance, work with what you have and increase resourses. No rush no fuss.