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, agree Kalan - I'm totally in empathy with what Zeusfuria has to say, but for me this is no time to sell up. However, if the share is still sub 20p in 3 months time....
Agree Zeusfuria. There is a disconnect between growing the company and growing the share price. The board get more income from growing the business as they can pay themselves more in wages. the board remuneration needs to be in part linked to the share price for alignment to take place. The fact that the CEO has many shares will also do this. However, they are looking at the overall cash generation and business health and size and so to them the $5million loan facility is trivial. The takeover was $315 million and the company is potentially worth double that and more so $5 million is trivial in that respect. they either don't realise or don't care that PI's get nervous when the share price drops and drops again and then just as it is recovering drops yet again. As far as the CEO is concerned - so what - he gets more in salary as the company grows and he isn't selling shares any time soon so what's the problem. In fact he could buy more with his increased salary and at a lower price. Win win win.
If they don't align with us then we have to follow them which means buying when the sp drops and holding and building a very large position - so now is not the time to whinge it is the time to time your next purchase or you are in the wrong share. I think I am in the wrong share ever since they moved away from the strategy of drilling and went to rapid expansion through takeover. Can't turn back the clock so we have to look forward. Is this a good investment at 17p, 18p, 19p ,20p etc if so then we should be buying if we have the wherewithal. Brassed off with the way things have turned out - yes. Selling up - no. That would be like a remoaner refusing to export to new lucrative markets after Brexit - looking back with regret instead of grabbing the opportunities ahead. looks like the bottom is here or very close right now. Expecting more sideways / weakness in the next 24 hours before the bargain hunters step in.
I'm very much in empathy with that, Zeusfuria. Good luck.
Happysparrow On the basis of recent (in)action I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that I have been trying to avoid for a while that the BoD and AK are not acting in the interests of PI's. That's not to say that there won't be good returns for PI's here but that it is not at the forefront of the company's mind. II returns and self-interest/salaries are prominent. There have been too many examples of indifference towards PI's for me. I need to trust senior management to invest in a company and a week or 2 back decided that management with greater integrity and equal opportunity exist elsewhere. I believe that SAVP will produce very good returns for holders but trust is also important for me and knowing that the BoD has the backs of PI's. Good luck all.
Thanks, Interzone.
It's not the rate of interest, but the dilution, and handing the lender the decision as to when to hit us hard at the SP's weakest point, that is of concern. Too, it would be misleading to RNS the renewal of the Oragroup facility if it had largely been used up at that time, unless they also mentioned it had largely been used up - otherwise it gives the false impression that there is a new £10m available for the company when that is not the case.
The company has failed to RNS on the 17th April whether the $5m loan was repaid in cash or not (note: that is all we needed to know, not the following detail on the shares issued and price).
Forewarned by shareholders, the BoD has been prepared to damage the SP and investor confidence in order to, it seems, hand over 20m shares to vultures who it was known would then take advantage of us. The sensible option to close the loan early and arrange a loan on better terms (eg RBL against £10m monthly FCF) was not pursued.
This is three poor decisions that you would perhaps expect from third-rate management.
The question is why?
Why, instead, did they not use money from the Oragroup facility, the cash received from the 7E transaction, the £10m monthly FCF, or the £50m oil trading loan?
I note the Euro 11.4m Oragroup facility originally stated (Dec 2016): 'available for working capital, potential asset acquisitions and general corporate purposes' whereas the 13th Dec 2019 renewal states: 'The Facility was originally signed in December 2016 and was designed for working capital and general corporate purposes. The Facility has been renewed for a further three years and will continue to be used for the same purposes as in the original agreement.'
Thus the wording 'potential asset acquisition' was removed from the later RNS although it will still be part of the original agreement. (And I assume that the Oragroup facility was not largely spent when the 13th Dec 2019 RNS came out, making the RNS deliberately misleading). Thus, it seems, the Bod did not use the Oragroup facility (instead using the Riverfort/ Yorkville trash loan for working capital) as the Oragroup facility has been earmarked for asset acquisitions. Perhaps part of a large acquisition - the remaining 7E oil business? Lekoil assets? Many others?
An explanation, perhaps, as to why our BoD has made the decision to retain the $5m cash loan? (The other explanation being that they just make poor decisions).