The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode with London Stock Exchange Group's Chris Mayo has just been released. Listen 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.
HI PUB it is there choice no one forces people to buy shares . I THOUGHT you was leaveing shares ,
You have a serious problem publican and so does your left hand when posting as contrarian.
Why don`t you just go and give it a rest. You are not a shareholder of HZM so stop criticizng genuine stock holders.
Your negative ramblings are so boring. FFS !!!
You are personal with wassaper. Why don`t you just get a life that is meaningful.
You remind me so much of trader465, another poster from Thailand, or have I caught you out? Must be a very, very, close friend of yours.
We will know one way or another by the middle of April as it says interim funding will be required by then.
Also very obvious what 'the market' thinks which is 0, company wiped out or 0, existing equity wiped out. The market can be right, it can be wrong. If it is wrong in the context of misunderstanding what the cornerstones can, and will do, and what the ex-CEO of La Mancha can, and will do in raising finance, then -> it underestimated the deal that was struck and the equity will find a new price based on that deal. We don't know. And $600m is a large number. Could clearly go either way.
By the way my contrarian view is one of a number of possibilities. I don't know if it's more likely than no funding and all bust, or funding but PIs wiped out. I don't know, and thankfully there is no decision for me to make on the basis I don't know, because:
- my 1m or so shares are not worth very much at the moment
- I don't have a further £1m to commit
So we wait and hope I guess :)
>>A company in a highly stressed scenario raising at a 900% premium - sure of course.
But the current price is arbitrary? Example - I buy £1m of HZM shares in the next 3 weeks. Sound far fetched? True, it is, I don't have £1m but I've bought that many before. atmo that gets me sthg like 15% of the company. There are _plenty_ of institutions out there with a spare £1m and they just need a whiff of a deal. What will the shareprice be if:
- 15% of the company gets bought in next 3 weeks
- the shorts close, because a deal is coming
Just wondering if there is a precedent for that?
The current sp is arbitrary - it has been lower, and higher, in the last few weeks. Cornerstones could put in interim funding of $100m USD in 2 weeks time, what will the SP be then I wonder?
The Company continues to hold discussions to restructure the group's debt in conjunction with seeking a fully funded solution and is actively engaging existing and new potential investors. In connection with such discussions, the Company is continuing to provide information to senior lenders, and existing and new potential investors (under confidentiality agreements), including the full financing amount. As previously announced, the Company expects that it will require additional interim funding around mid-April to implement such full funding solution.
"How much - what number? I think at a push it could be 1bn-1.25bn shares (4:1 or 5:1 dilution) at 20p."
A company in a highly stressed scenario raising at a 900% premium - sure of course. Any precedents for this you can name?
The higher the share price the better for everybody . Cornerstones , Private investors , banks , future II.
Easier to raise money and borrow against and even dilute . Although I do not want to see yet more shares issued .
It is in everyone’s interest , unless you are shorting it .
(see what I did there?)
Company survives. Cornerstones do equity higher than market expects. Why? Because:
1. doing it higher means the company maintains liquidity because pre-existing shareholdings count towards liquidity
2. doing it higher means less new funding to find because proportionately less $ needs to be new investors for the same reason as above
3. doing it higher maintains their pre-existing investment
How much - what number? I think at a push it could be 1bn-1.25bn shares (4:1 or 5:1 dilution) at 20p. This would raise in the ballpark of $250m-$300m from equity, and if Glen chip in with some prepay / offtake / royalty type deal as well could bridge the gap to debt keeping total debt sub $500m and making the mine viable.
If equity is done at 1p I'll eat 50% of my shares (physically), as they'll be worthless anyway.
GLA - sun is shining (metaphorically speaking), my 1.9p buys are in the money, and once the raise is done at 20p pub barman will tell us he bought a gazillion at the same price.
Wasarunner, It’s not that complicated, any new investor will be at major major advantage, ant the same existing ones can also keep their percentage same or Glencore can further increase it. Nickel has to rise or average around 26k IMO. Still very much inclined, a bid will land above 70p.
Well the capex cost (from DFS) was 2.5x. As long as the opex cost from DFS isn't also 2.5x, we're profitable :-)
I'm joking of course but it has bound to have gone up. The electricity price was fixed nice and low though.
Well that is another $100m they have available for investment elsewhere.
Maybe HZM is 3rd time lucky.
Now that the new CAPEX is known and financing cost, the new OPEX cost could do with being published. I’m presuming that those will be known by the company and shared to the privileged. I would also suggest that these have to be solid to be believable. The shutters haven’t been brought down yet so maybe the mine will still provide an adequate level of profitability.
I invested in Horizonte the first four years ago on the open market look long term income though dividends. (Yes. Bad decision! But I’ll have to live with that.)
I did all the due diligence I could and bought. That was looking through reports, presentations and any other information I could get. My decision to invest was verified by the funding being realised.
Although everything has changed, somehow I feel we’re are the beginning again. The same questions, the same forecasts, a different but same bearish market. The decisions taken then were full of risk and uncertainty. Some may say that as time has passed and what’s happened has happened that risk and uncertainty has diminished a fraction or two.
So to conclude is the case for investment by the majors now stronger?
Could be a raise at 2p now instead of 1p . The more the price increases the higher the placing price will be.
More good news is needed like Tuesday RNs.
We need a good leak to suggest an agreement is near. Might get a big leap then .
I’m always amazed at people commenting on the share price movement on the TSX.
Yesterday someone mentioned it was 75% up at close trading at an equivalent 3.5p.
Now we have comment on a 25% drop with only one sale of 35k shares.
Are they really a barometer, given the small volume?
Cheaper than a lousy curry
62 Shares were bought for 2.1999 p !! Cost £1.36
Looks like it's being bought on the lse @ 2.20 as its up 17% !
Looks like Horizonte is being dumped on the TSX the same way you dump a lousy curry the day after.
I guess the rumour mill got it wrong. Nothing new there then.
TDT
>>La Mancha/Orion/Glencore could finance this themselves but it doesn't suit them to do so, and ironically, that makes financing it harder.
Also IMHO the reason we have a financier in charge who has pulled in $50bn in deals. If he can't do it, it isn't getting done. If only the three parties needed to agree it with the banks, I think that's would have been more straightforward.
The challenge the cornerstones have got, which is what I think makes it complicated to get this deal done: even if the three of them could finance it (+ some debt from banks) because they want to maintain liquidity, keep it listed, and have it traded open market, they MUST attract further investment and can't carve up the $600m required between them. My reading of the Appian deal was that other investors didn't want to come in when Glen+La Mancha were taking the major share because they would always be in a minority shareholding in a company run by two majors.
The reason that's challenging here is irrespective of the terms on which La Mancha, Glen, Orion are _prepared_ to fund their slice of the capex requirement, they have to convince a.n.other partie(s) that this will remain a liquid company not entirely under their control where the further cornerstone(s) will have liquidity to buy/sell open market. To do that they have to offer terms attractive enough to the new investors because the new investors aren't in the 'we're going to lose $250m if this deal doesn't get done' scenario.
And therein lies the challenge. I think La Mancha/Orion/Glencore could finance this themselves but it doesn't suit them to do so, and ironically, that makes financing it harder. All IMHO.
IMHO Glencore will not want to have a majority here, but will work with the others (particularly LaMancha who they are close to - see SPAC reference).
https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1028226?SNAPI
This was an announcement made back in February.
Glencore have wasted over $300m per year for a number of years.
Processing costs were far too high as Ni quality was rather low per tonne processed.
They will provide final $200m over the next 6 months until a new buyer is sourced.
No doubt during this six month period, they will be looking for new investment opportunities. If they can spend $300m per annum on a loss making company, then Hzm is prime to take to production within 18 months and then into profit.
HZM is of higher quality and concentration per tonne is also higher.
If Glencore believe that this will eventually be a profitable mine over a very long period of time, then Imo, they may want to put big bucks into getting the mine into production.
There are ways and means of putting funds into this operation and if Glencore want a majority here then they will have to certainly go a long way to funding the project. This could include a mix of issueing new shares and cornerstone/ lender finance.
We shall just have to wait for the ink to dry on what I perceive to be a joint approach by both lenders and cornerstones.
Because this (should?) be a profitable mine? As I understand it the new caledonia mine never was. Unless the opex estimates here were wildly out and the debt balloons through refinancing making this un-financeable, but the due diligence should discover that if so.
If this mine can't be profitable, then agreed. But that's what being bottom quartile on cost is supposed to give you - security against low commodity prices.