Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. 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.
I think it unlikely that DB would be in the business of rescuing a distressed company. As I said they could have exited at a profit on occasions before consolidation, as the principal investor they would have been tracking our progress throughout and I think if they caught a whiff of collapse they'd be gone even if they lost on the 0.025 shares, they were never in a position where but for further funding they would lose their investment, they wouldn't have let it get to that. Also if the placing took place with EUZ in peril of collapse the placing price would have been pernicious not fractionally higher than the previous one. It's also probable that they would have insisted on a place on the board. The evidence to me points to them believing that increasing their position at 12.75p is a good investment, remember they will have fought tooth and nail to get it lower.
Usually I regard consolidation as an unnecessary expense, but after becoming valued at fractions of hundredths of a penny, it was right at that time for euz.
Thanks for noting the non-rampy comments CHRI5P I do get a bit of stick for remaining positive! Talking of ramping I see we are getting more Twitter mentions and most of it isn't too OTT - I see even CJ has posted about EUZ :) Someone called Hotandcoldstocks has tipped us claiming there is very little free stock, don't know how they know that but it fits with 'allthewinners' experience on Thursday.
Bobby I appreciate there's a place for the contrarian view but I also think that you take it too far sometimes - 'a current institutional investor forced into saving their investment'. Sorry but that is ridiculous, before the last placing they held stock at 7.5p and 12.5p new money so had ample opportunity to exit with a healthy profit. Instead they chose to invest more at 12.75p, that is not being forced into saving their investment. Let's try and stay on good terms but that IMO you have taken the negative slant too far. Agree wholeheartedly that it would be reassuring to see some fresh institutional blood.
The main point at issue is that the AIM market is not a market but a casino of PI's trying to search for the next multi bagger and the only research is no research just follow the money. If it goes up 20% buy if goes down 20% sell. We can talk until the cows come home about the resources but sentiment and perception moves markets at the moment facts and proof of resources don't. Negative people on this board only make sentiment and perception worse and create their own failures. I do suggest people read the UFO/EUA boards and you might realise what I am talking about. They are full of rampers with 500 posts a day making out that they have the APPLE of the AIM market - at times it is just complete and utter nonsense. However, rightly or wrongly the message is clear buy and you have a bargain, sell and you are an idiot. In July, shed rightly was giving information about the EU grant possibilities without ramping, the Mets results were being speculated and talk of no placing (wrongly). The share rose 4 fold. The share price fell when the grant did not materialise and fell further due to the placement. However, the placing was done at a good price, the mets was better than expected and we have EU grant funding. So I will say it again it is not about what we have it is more about people believing/understanding what we have that is important.
I gleaned this from the Financial report. Make up your own mind whether it would be EUZ or the asset which could be sold.
"Exploration and evaluation costs
Exploration and evaluation costs are written off in the
year they are incurred apart from acquisition costs which
are carried forward where right of tenure of the area of
interest is current. The future recoverability of exploration
and evaluation expenditure is dependent on a number of
factors, including whether the Group decides to exploit
the related lease itself, or, if not, whether it successfully
recovers the related exploration and evaluation assets
through sale."
Also forgot to say that as TP highlight we will be better placed to choose a course of action for the asset after the PFS is completed. I had hoped something could be done non-dilutive to avoid a placing but I was on record at the time as saying there was a danger of a bad deal even if non-dilutive, put simply, giving too much away to get cash. Someone else put it better as 'dilution of the asset'. With a PFS we will be in a stronger position and we may even look back at the placing with a different opinion of it. Finally I'm not sure we'll ever see a 'special dividend' Bobby as even if we sell Toral it would likely constitute a complete company sale and we would receive a distribution of our share of EUZ. Interesting that TP also reference JV options after PFS or proceeding independently through a 60:40 debt:equity-funded development, there is absolutely no guarantee we are ever going to be sold let alone have LR putting up the 'For Sale' sign in the meantime.