The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register 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.
Annual rate of return implies an annual income you are just talking about a one off gain over 12 months which is a different matter - again a distorted fact...
@mrcautious “Where do you get the 35% annual rate of return figure from dare I ask !”
Current price 56p. Ganfeng pays 67.5p in six months. That’s a 20.5% return, annualized to 41%. How do you get anything different?
I think you've exposed him, Mrcautious.
Most buying in for a quick flip are more likely to to have bought in at around 55p - This is more of a 20% flip.
Everything he writes, is tailored towards convincing people to 'accept' this offer as there are convoluted reasons as to why it's a great offer. Yet, he'll do so ignoring the facts that don't suit this argument, and he'll do so behaving as though he's yet to make up his mind.
But right there, you've nailed his agenda.
The other chap (Puzzle something) has/had a short on - And he's gone quiet.
BorderBob just wants a nice, quiet flip with no delays. He doesn't even want a higher amount - He just wants his 19.52% within an 8 month timeframe,
So it just goes to show BB is very good at stating facts that are so close to fiction yet very credible ! He makes it sound like a dividend ! But he just wants a trouble-free flip poor devil, I'm all choked up for him now !
He's factoring in having bought at the 43.875p mark, and calculating 35% takes him to 67.5p.
Which further discredits him. Surely at that price you bought based on long term prospects, and NOT for a 35% flip?
Where do you get the 35% annual rate of return figure from dare I ask !
It's got to be per post?
Imagine if he'd get behind the campaign? He'd drive everyone else out in a matter of seconds!
I wonder if he is paid per post basis, or as a lump sum bonus at the end in the event of a successful takeover ?
Crikey - just dropped in to the board and see BB is still going strong !!
And of course, if we succeed, we'll probably just have to deal with you for a while longer.
For someone who doesn't know what to do, you sure do seem to have strong opinions.
Either way, I don't think you have much of an impact (asides from incentivitising people to email the campaign), and I look forward to your sudden departure from this board the moment the takeover is complete.
My agenda is about as hidden as your predilection for cheerleading. I am here to learn from other’s mistakes, and to be amused by their foibles. At every moment I consider whether to sell what I have, or buy more. A 35% annual rate of return, assuming a deal closes in December, looks too good to be true – and therefore is likely not to happen. Your opinion may differ, but it is unfortunate that dissent is not tolerated here.
I'm hardly anonymous.
But let me be clear, you make posts mixing facts with a borderline persuasiveness to put me off this company. That's what you do.
All your facts are either neutral, or bearish. You don't post anything bullish, yet you claim to be a shareholder.
What you have, is a HIDDEN AGENDA. And that is why you need to maintain your anonymity.
Simply, you're gaslighting.
Interesting strategy, attempting to discredit me by insinuating I should not want anonymity when insulted by the group of nameless trolls you have assembled. I asked mick88 a question, he has no answers so he reverts to the “gaslighting” meme. Meanwhile, you want to answer only on your terms. I prefer to continue asking on my terms, especially when you ignore or forget what I have posted several times, that I am a shareholder. Why did you feel compelled to misstate that fact? One must be careful with misstatements, before starting to believe them.
And speaking of solar, Ganfeng is doing just that in Argentina.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ganfeng-lithium-argentina/chinas-ganfeng-to-invest-in-solar-powered-lithium-project-in-argentina-idUSKCN2DU1XC
Let's discuss this over Zoom. Assuming you have no hidden agenda?
No, I did not mention any details about the offtake contract. I asked mrcautious if he had a copy because he seemed to know more about it than I do. My belief is that offtakes have common terms that are easily understood, and they don't include his assertion that BCN would control the price. I haven't found an offtake agreement that leaves the price open for negotiation. The sample I posted allows for negotiation in later years, and reference to a third-party arbitrator if that is not successful. He seemed to think the price could be set by BCN, which led me to ask for details. Please, no more personal attacks and twisting words today.
Are you kidding me BB, you specifically mention details about bcn and Gafang relationship regards product off take and I ask for proof of your nonsense and you give me an off take agreement for a completely different company and in a completely different product (oil)
Talk about miss information. That is total bull dust.
@steve “please show us your source for the off take agreement details you mention here.”
You can find samples with a Google search. Here’s one:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1556766/000119312512436698/d400066dex1032.htm
Seems simple to me. “Seller will sell and Buyer will purchase all of Seller’s Products.” That seems to have boosted BCN’s value before shareholders decided that sharing a bed with a Chinese company, inexperienced in clay mining, was not to their advantage. I’m open to the idea that even with Ganfeng being both Seller and Buyer, the contract was written to BCN’s advantage. Just show me where and how.
@mrcautious “Even given Ganfengs offtake agreement WHY should shareholders allow them to takeover the company so cheap.”
“Cheap” is your opinion, not shared by the market or possible other bidders. If there were any intelligent discussion here, someone might have asked when a competitor would make a higher bid: Before the Ganfeng offer is made, or after it is on the table? I would expect next month, but it would be a strange mating ritual. “I’m going to outbid you because I want to be your partner.”
“Western economies do not want Chinese dominance of strategic resources to happen.”
Western economies have been perfectly happy with that situation for years. Why did the American rare-earth mine close and sell its equipment to China? Why did the G7 not encourage Australia to process its own rocks instead of loading them on a slow boat to China?
Lithium is not a strategic resource, any more than American soybeans are a strategic resource for Chinese buyers. For the next few years, lithium refining is a strategic manufacturing process.
BB - I accept the british access to the resource is not a primary play, but a) isnt it a bad thing for a chinese company to gain full control of a resource so cheaply ? b) Even given Ganfengs offtake agreement WHY should shareholders allow them to takeover the company so cheap. If you had a pile of cash on your coffee table and a man rushed in and grabbed it would you do nothing ?? I know your agenda is to make us all capitulate and lose the will to live regarding this potential deal - but it aint going to happen. Even if NO British company EVER buys any of this Li the Western economies do not want Chinese dominance of strategic resources to happen.
"You are changing the subject. Ganfeng DOES have first shout, and the jv DOES have to sell everything to them (except for what the Japanese get). As a reminder, the topic is how the takeover affects British access to a Mexican resource. Simple answer: It doesn’t. But do you have a copy of the contract? You seem to know what it contains. Where can I find one?"
Well BB I can ask you the same, you seem to suggest here you are privy to contract information that we aren't, so please show us your source for the off take agreement details you mention here.
@mrcautious “ even if Ganfeng did have first shout on Lithium produced, if we still controlled the resource we would control the price and other factors,”
You are changing the subject. Ganfeng DOES have first shout, and the jv DOES have to sell everything to them (except for what the Japanese get). As a reminder, the topic is how the takeover affects British access to a Mexican resource. Simple answer: It doesn’t. But do you have a copy of the contract? You seem to know what it contains. Where can I find one?
@jam2morrow “I think they're underway drilling well bore-holes”
Wouldn’t you think that’s one of the first steps to take, rather than waiting until construction is about to begin based on some guess as to water availability?
Iv been getting emails “have you been mis-sold solar panels?”, I can just envisage a picture of border-bob “call me 1-800-mis-sold-solar!
sky - Dont think borderbob is an engineer, I happen to be an electronic engineer by sheer fluke ! And I can see his argument has picky holes in it regarding solar PV's
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Mexico
wouldn't be surprised if they did utilise solar to some extent. Water of course will be an issue, its a desert ,i think they're underway drilling well bore-holes (don't be shy with the mundane RNSs Peter !) Not such a big problem as the brine producers have, of course, where water accessibility is a major factor
The efficiency of solar panels reduces by typically 0.45% to 0.50% per degree Celsius over 25°C. So at 45°C that's worst case power reduction of 9%-10%.
Not really a big deal, I'm sure Ganfeng will know a Chinese PV supplier, maybe they can even buy 10 get 1 free.