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.
One of the ways to look at this is in the bullish statement from the Chair. Sure it’s her job to be bullish, just like any of the senior roles. However, last April she invested almost 200K of her own money. Some could argue “well she’s probably wealthy so she can afford it” or similar rhetoric. However….
1. Wealthy people are generally wealthy because they don’t or don’t like losing their OWN money.
2. Her occupation by trade is accountant, accountants are generally cautious people with money
3. She moved the acquisition into her SIPP, which suggests this wasn’t a frivolous action, tax efficient possibly yes.
4. Her DOB is listed as 1957 (source companies house) which makes her close to retirement age, which would suggest she would be seeking a return on that investment in the not too distant future!
Sorry Eileen if you read this, not trying to be ageist with the last point!
Sure this is a gamble but the stocks that really do well are those that are often unloved by the market and are picked up by the brave when the market gives them a kicking. I tend to agree with the sentiment that this should have a market cap way higher than it currently is.
Why would BCM choose to invest in a dud when they have so much experience in this sector, is it because they just like wasting their money too? Obviously we will need some results from the drilling for others to see before the penny finally drops. Let’s hope we get some cracking results.
I flew over Cameroon on Tuesday night on my way down to Capetown and raised a few G&Ts as the plane passed over. When we get to 1p I’m definitely thinking of a field trip out to one of those licences!!!
It was never going to be quick but hopefully it will be here soon.
High risk, high reward. No one said this would be a walk in the park.
Take from the RNS.
CLP/Mbe, "Mineralisation was returned from a range of host rocks including variable brecciated shear and extensional quartz veins and altered wall rock. The highest grade returned from a wall rock sample was 5.94 g/t Au over 0.90m (within MBTR05 2.10m @ 3.69 g/t Au) suggesting the potential for near-surface bulk-mineable mineralisation."
‘Which brings me finally to our shareholders who, I suspect, are battered and bruised but hopefully now a little more optimistic of a brighter future’.
YUP!
Away you go and invest there then…
I have been looking at the FCA website and there is a very easy way of reporting suspected market manipulation via this link and using the 'webform' facility.
https://www.fca.org.uk/markets/market-abuse/how-report-suspected-market-abuse-individual
Failure by an entity to update the market of their equity position on a timely basis does constitute a form of market manipulation, as per Bob Smeeton's interview, any individual with a holding over 3% are supposed to report every 1% move.
The reason the TR1 rule exists is to give onlookers a view to how a share price may perform over the short/medium term, for example, how many times when a major seller declares they are either out or nearly out the share price will bounce, sometimes disproportionally.
My view is some entities do not report on-time for a purpose, I also believe that companies should remind entities of their declaration responsibilities.
Something for consideration.
The update today was bullish from the Chair, no wonder given the potential, gold touching $2200oz overnight.
All good, ducks lining up, £100m mcap on its way
Make more in crypto
Hard not to be excited by Eileen's words. So much positive and the worst now behind us.
Debating whether to keep my shares in this because I do believe it will be the next GGP OR remove and bolster my crypto positions.
If ORR wasn't more or less guaranteed to be the next GGP I'd be tempted to warn against having too many eggs in one basket.
I mean my spread bet is equivalent to 70 grand of shares.
It feels like the MM contact Lanstead to try to take my 3K per point spread bet from me.
As when I make it safe they leave me alone, and in comes a 1.5m buy at 0.255p.
I was getting quoted that price at the time, since I spend all day every day checking the buy and sell limits.
I also have 27 grand in shares on H and L in Oriole.
Hey Kutzz we know as well as anyone here the SP has always been manipulated. There have been days with big buys and it drops for no reason. All the black shares that appear god only knows if they are buys or sells as the SP doesn't make sense from day to day. Why is the SP not regulated, who is it that has the power to determine if this goes up or down. Theres someone making a lot of money at this manipulation and its not anyone here. Maybe 1 day we'll get our money back. Lol
I prefer to end the day on 100 percent margin. As I would hate to be stopped out just before Oriole has a massive turnaround. I have already lost half of my inheritance on stocks in general, and this is why Oriole is now the only share I hold. As well as a few QBT on spread x that does not effect my Oriole.
Elon
its across the board on aim explo's,all my watchlist is well lower,except for one.
even one,where the bod have just bought £50k in shares,is lower?
A shame that such low volume causes such big drops in share price, with so much potential the SP remains suppressed.
Who knows if it’s Lanstead, the wider market or just Oriole in general.
Just got to wait for results to be due.
I had 10 grand in C4X Discovery that I lost 3 grand on, and then Oriole dropping.
I was forced to close just over a million in Oriole and to cut down my spread bet by 7.5K per point.
Therefore just take advantage of my misfortune by buying a few.
I'm not alone I hope, but feel it is getting worse in general...the manipulation, the trolling, the insider information...not just ORR but everywhere. There are so many rogue CEO's who get away with lying and not giving a damn about shareholders. I'm hoping the slide across the market is down a little to the end of tax year, people selling any profits they can etc... But at least (I hope) I can say the ORR board are decent guys. They respond to questions and whilst it has been a tough time getting to this point, think bit more patience will reward us.
The ironic thing is that faceless Lanstead, you know the ones that have a website with no individual names of sales agents, management or directors are probably reading this and laughing their socks off at us all as we speculate their position.
IF they were going to declare every 1% then they should have done so when they sold another 35m shares, dropping through 20% in the process, we all know they have probably sold 200m/300m shares as the total volume since 28th December has been 1.6b.
Frankly I do not know how they get away with it.
I suspect ORR management do not want to upset them as clearly they find the funding arrangement fantastic !
Imo Tim needs to show some teeth and put pressure on Lanstead to be honest and update the markets promptly in an orderly fashion, that they agreed in the terms of the deal.
Contracts have been signed and i wouldn’t think (but who knows with these ‘loan sharks’ if they’ve put in some clause).
Report Lanstead to the FCA to breeching TR1 notification rules.
As it is it’s clearly not forming a fair & ordinary market.
From the ‘Lanstead will declare every 1%’ interview on the 1st August -
Tim Blythe: ‘… can Lanstead actually benefit though by the share price being lower than the benchmark price rather than going higher?’
Bob Smeeton: ‘Lanstead make more money the higher the share price is. They’ve got no incentive at all for the share price to decline so they very much see themselves as aligned with the long term shareholders. They will do well when Oriole does well and Oriole will receive more money should the share price do well…’
I’ve tried to do some modelling to see how the deal could work for Lanstead. Obviously, I have no idea what Lanstead are doing but I have made the following assumptions: Lanstead sell an equal amount of their allotted shares every day for the 24 month duration of the agreement. Considering the subscription shares and the value payment shares and assuming 252 trading days each year (21 per month) then that’s pretty much £2M shares to be sold each day, as estimated previously by others. I’ve also assumed that the average sale price for these shares in the 21 days leading up to each settlement day is the same as the 20 day VWAP on the settlement day. Ignoring fees or any other costs then -
At benchmark price 0.2533p:
Share sales (21 trading dates x 2M): £106,386
Payment to ORR: £73,625
Lanstead profit: £32,761
At 50% benchmark price 012665p
Share sales: £53,193
Payment to ORR: £36,812.50
Lanstead profit: £16,380.50
At 200% benchmark price 0.5066p:
Share sales: £212,772
Payment to ORR: £147,250
Lanstead profit: £65,522
So, based on my assumptions, Lanstead monthly profit is £32,721 at benchmark price and, like the monthly payments to ORR, that figure increases / decreases with percentage change from the benchmark price.
I adjusted my model to see what the minimum number of sales Lanstead would have to make to cover the monthly payments to ORR. With my other assumptions remaining the same then they would have to sell around 1.384M shares each day for this. Gives an idea of how many shares that they have to retain to cover future payments and how many that they could sell whenever it suits them.
I had previously thought that they might try and manipulate they price to maximise their revenue from share sales and minimise monthly payments. I’m not sure that could be practically achieved or even worthwhile.
Perhaps Lanstead and our interests are well aligned. All we know is that by 28 December they had sold 202.4M shares. Equivalent of 2.024M per trading day up to that point (100 trading days) which is in line with my model.
The above is based on my understanding, is unchecked and could be nonsense.
Its really frustrating that you wait 2 month for news get a 10% rise then its wiped out with about 30 k worth of sells over 2 days even though there were just as many buys. It makes you wonder how this will make a good rise and sustain it for any amount of time.
Thanks Lanstead !!
ORR has never made any sense whatsoever. I would expect consistent inflows as the project is derisked.