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 and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
Remember the screw up on the mine construction methodology early days-he was trying to do the lot on the SXX balance sheet.Early warning sign
TF - you say" I do think the issue here is not about Fraser-more about the quality of the financial advice."
But the problem I and many others have is that Frasers background is finance. He wasn't part of the Fortescue team like Scrimshaw and Catlow, he was part of the Citibank finance team that put the funding together for Fortescue. He wasn't bringing any mining or infrastructure/construction experience to Sirius. He was bringing his finance acumen and contacts - or at least that's what I and many others thought.
So the problem is Fraser and it is Frasers to own. With his background and experience, how he ended up being let down a dark alley where it looks like we might all get mugged, is hard to comprehend.
HE created the problem and he's only made it worse by his cowrdly behavior and blame everyone but himself attitude in the last six months and not even an apology.
Having taken a huge hit on AAOG , down to sheer incompetence of the BOD, I do think the issue here is not about Fraser-more about the quality of the financial advice.
I used Greece as an example of the strength of the bond market-if you read the FT article at the time, they were critical of the peddled excuse of a troubled bond market.The reality is the bond market is very strong and has been for some time.
I don’t think a bond was ever the safe way forward but certainly the most attractive for shareholders, limiting dilution.Nobody complained are the time and we all took comfort from the high quality of the advisors involved.
I don’t think this is a stitch up by the BOD-they have pushed into a corner by betting the farm on a bond when equity should have been raised.I have said before-bonds really need cash flow and that’s a long way off, so it’s equity.
As for Odey-I know him well.He is not your friend-he simply sees a way to make a quick turn.Simple as that.Frankly its chicken feed so why they are taking Anglo on is beyond me.
It’s very clear the mine will go ahead come what may.Anglo can either pick it up in admin or pay an equity price-the bonds in place are not at risk.
It’s a bloody mess but largely self inflicted by poor strategy in my opinion and it’s appalling many have been caught up in the flack
Tex, I agree with your 9.19. Odey is not our friend. Another penny on his 93M shares is meaningful for him (and at a 5p entry point is an additional 20% return in a matter of days/weeks) but a 1p increase does little for me and other PI's at this stage.
BUT Odey might assist with a no vote and then the stakes are raised. Does the "interloper" appear as Odey suggests and will that interloper force the price up or, instead, provide funding?
Odey likely had his original 93M CFD on a margin at a fraction of the value of the shares, but yesterday he swapped the CFD for shares, meaning he's now in this for 19M hard cash. While we know he would jump at 7p but a rescue would suit him better than 7p because funding ought to give a more meaningful boost to the SP in the coming months.
I don't particularly care for his firms general MO, but he has put 19M money where his mouth is and has said he'll vote no to 5.5p, so he's also banking on something positive happening after a no vote and before administration is triggered and he has staked a lot more than any of us on the idea that a no vote is not necessarily the end of the matter, as Fraser would have us believe.
Hi Truth. The outstanding comment for a long time is the fact that Greek bonds are @1%, They are a crack pot,debt ridden country, no one pays tax. SXX has a LOM of 100 yrs with billions of profits coming, but JPM could not raise a smallish $600mil, if you believe that, i have a bridge in London to sell to you. This whole debacle stinks to high heaven. The problem is that no one in a position to challenge JPM ever will. Do not expect the FCA to do anything. ATB Speedy
LTV I just had to say I completely agree with your 8.05
That is exactly why I have voted NO
I’m contributing here but cutting down unless I see sensible posts like that as I’m afraid it’s getting for to toxic for me.
Please guys if you do contact the times reporter by all means show some anger but stick to facts!!!!
Some of the comments recently have gone too far imo and will not win us any friends if posted in the press !!!
Chris Fraser freely admits that he had no background in mining when he became “heavily invested” in Sirius Minerals, the North Yorkshire fertiliser mine developer. The former financial executive from Australia decided to join Sirius with the aim of becoming a wealthy CEO so that he could spend more time on his yacht. “With all the propaganda that Sirius spewed out, it seemed like a safe bet,” he says.
It hasn’t turned out that way. Having bought in as high as 0p, Mr Fraser faces making only £7m, which would only buy the sort of boat that other millionaires would laugh at.
LTV - correct. People are mobilising in an attempt to secure alternative funding to ensure the shares remain in their hands.
I doubt many are looking for 7p.
It’s worthy to note that whilst Odey’s email helps in terms of bringing visibility to the undervalued offer made, it does not mention any case for raising cash versus just pushing for a higher T/O offer.
Everyone has an agenda and theirs is to make 20%-30% more than they will currently get. It’s not the same agenda as most PIs..... just worth people knowing how they will play if this goes to a no vote and then a slightly improved offer comes in.
Cover your arse and then vote to screw the local Yorkshire employees? Wow. You’re not punishing CF he loses zero - sorry, £10k! LOL. He will be peeved but will find another 7 figure Exec job.
If people are voting no, based on principals or in the belief they are punishing CF etc. , which will more than likely effect the people they claim they originally invested in, I would suggest it’s only right that they are prepared to lose the remainder of their money. If you are voting no because you believe (like Odey) that there is potentially an interloper waiting or that AAL can stretch to 7p+ then there is no need to sell anything just vote no.
If you are voting yes to ensure the mine is built and prospers the local region and employment, then just vote yes.
If you are worried about a no vote and losing everything, just sell now at 5p and a bit.
I think those are the options available. Or am I missing something?
Seems a lot of people have forgotten the reasons they originally invested or claimed they invested.
I think this will be a vote for ‘no’ and based on that there may be a higher offer along the lines of Odey’s suggestions, I unfortunately believe it is too late to raise cash through other means to ensure PIs retain their shares and the mine is taken to the next stage.
Those worried about the outcome and losing even more should sell in the market-keep a few back to vote no to satisfy your principles.
Truth factory , just to make it clear i am not one of the holders any more but where you say sell some and hold a few back for voting remember each share is a vote , so if you hold a million you have a million votes ,
some still think the government were calling for a bail out , they never ever asked for one they only wanted a gove guarantee the company would have been able to pay back the loans with the amount of torps , sxx would have had more torps on production , any torp pulling out there would be another to take it`s place ,
did the company think about going to another country for a guarantee like China to guarantee or even borrow the money and do a deal , they want million of tons of poly , the order book is full , not like some companies begging for money who know will never pay it back , good luck all and i hope you get a better offer , by rights A&A should offer what the last cash call was for . GLA
Please explain why a guarantee, which is essentially a promissory note, is not value.Would you provide a guarantee?It might be called.Then what?The whole project carries big risk-to deny that is foolhardy.
As for the fundraise, an admirable attempt but I think a major challenge-one the board should have sanctioned before their bond adventure.
I’m not being provocative-I sold out a couple of years ago when the hype became all consuming-talk of massive dividends,world domination-without much thought to the intervening 5 or 6 years to get there.
I live in the area and want the mine to happen for obvious reasons.But I’m being realistic-the only alternative outcome in my view is an increase in the offer.This is precisely what Odey thinks
And it’s not about risking everything for an extra 10 or 20 %. It’s about trying to find an alternative to the takeover. A fundraise not a takeover. Step forward QIA or kiss those $100 million bonds goodbye.
The fundraise is in its very early stages. It has already proved there’s an appetite. If just 1500 can pledge almost 20m imagine what could be achieved had Sirius approached the pi base when there were 85000 of us.
As for government bailout. Nobody is looking for a bailout. No cash was changing hands. They were seeking a guarantee. But you probably know that and are being deliberately provocative and misleading.
Not much truth in your factory
I think Odey has it about right-beg for a higher price from Anglo.
Anglo will take great heart from the fact that the whip-round from shareholders is still sub £20m-a fraction of what the company needs to even make a staged finance package possible.
That leaves shareholders asking Anglo for an increase in their offer but Odey at 7p isn’t making heads turn either.
Those worried about the outcome and losing even more should sell in the market-keep a few back to vote no to satisfy your principles.
As for the government stepping in.Well the mine is going ahead anyway so the employment angle is satisfied.That leaves only the political angle of stepping in to bail out shareholders-that is a no no in my view.
I have said this before but it’s my view the real culprits here are the advisors on that bond-blaming market conditions in a world where Greek bonds are trading below 1pc
Tyler Broda of RBC Capital Markets:
"As a Sirius investor, is it worth risking everything for an extra 10 or 20 per cent?”
Yes. Yes it is. It's not about the money. It's about principles. Besides, it doesn't feel like I'm risking everything. As with many others, I'm risking the fraction of what I'm left with and I'm not afraid to lose it.
This may have already been posted but I found this one of the better articles of late.
Incase the link isn’t posted it’s Money Week - Do you own shares in Sirius Minerals? Here’s what you need to do now
This week Odey Asset Management waded in. The hedge fund run by Crispin Odey published an open letter from Henry Steel, a portfolio manage, pushing for a higher offer. It vowed to vote against the 5.5p-a-share bid unless it was declared “final”, but to accept any offer at 7p or above. Odey’s own stake is only 1.3 per cent, but the hedge fund is hoping to bring other funds on board, betting that Anglo will not want to risk the deal failing and have to fall back on buying Sirius out of administration.
The intervention also dangled more hope in front of retail shareholders, not only telling them that it believed Anglo would be prepared to bid substantially more but also suggesting that an “interloper” may emerge.
As Mr Steel points out, another complicating factor is turnout. Past AGMs have had only 35 per cent voting, giving “greatly magnified power to Sirius shareholders who do vote”. Anglo American has enlisted Georgeson to call shareholders and is promoting adverts on social networking sites urging them to vote.
Tyler Broda, of RBC Capital Markets, sees no reason for Anglo to increase its offer. “Until there is a practical alternative bid out there that stops [Sirius] from falling into bankruptcy, I don’t see what would drive that,” he says. He believes that ultimately Anglo’s efforts will prevail and that the vote will pass. “If it does go into administration, the current shareholders get nothing.” Voting no and holding out for a higher offer is, therefore, “a very high-risk path to take for shareholders . . . As a Sirius investor, is it worth risking everything for an extra 10 or 20 per cent?”
We will find out soon enough.
Yashmin Ismail freely admits that she had no background in mining when she became “heavily invested” in Sirius Minerals, the North Yorkshire fertiliser mine developer. The freelance copywriter from London decided to buy Sirius shares with the aim of subsidising her income so that she could spend more time with her young son. “With all the propaganda that Sirius spewed out, it seemed like a safe bet,” she says.
It hasn’t turned out that way. Having bought in as high as 30p, Ms Ismail faces heavy losses. Sirius — which says the risks of investing were always made clear — has reluctantly decided to recommend a 5.5p-a-share takeover bid from Anglo American after struggling to secure the $3 billion in funding that it needed to complete its ambitious polyhalite mine near Whitby.
However, Ms Ismail has decided she won’t give up without a fight. She has joined forces with others through Share Soc, the organisation that supports retail investors, which secured a meeting with management and broached the possibility of existing shareholders stumping up the $600 million (about £460 million) that the company needs to fund the next two years’ work.
Ms Ismail has set up the Fund Sirius campaign that is seeking shareholder pledges to try to convince Sirius there is an appetite for a £460 million for a bond issue. “The word on the street in the shareholder community is people are willing to chip in,” she says. As of last night, it had expressions of interest of only £18.3 million.
While there is little evidence to suggest Ms Ismail’s campaign can succeed, it is one of the reasons that the fate of Anglo’s £405 million takeover for Sirius Minerals is in some jeopardy. Sirius has a substantial retail shareholder base. As of December 2018, there were 85,000 individual investors holding close to half the stock.
Those close to the deal fear that the campaign risks distracting from what they insist is the real choice — back Anglo’s deal or see Sirius going bust, wiping out their investments altogether. Feelings among shareholders are running high. Many speak angrily of feeling betrayed. Some have said that they would rather vote the deal down and lose everything than see Sirius’s management move to lucrative jobs at Anglo. Others seem unwilling to believe that the situation is as Sirius makes out and are convinced a saviour offering a better deal is out there.
To pass at a meeting on March 3, the deal must be approved by 75 per cent of those voting by value of shareholdings, and a simple majority by number. A large number of small investors opposed to the deal could derail it.
This week Odey Asset Management waded in. The hedge fund run by Crispin Odey published an open letter from Henry Steel, a portfolio manage, pushing for a higher offer. It vowed to vote against the 5.5p-a-share bid unless it was declared “final”, but to accept any offer at 7p or above. Odey’s own stake is only 1.3 per cent, but the hedge fund is hoping to bring other funds on