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.
BB,
Thanks for your explanation if you can interpret the below line to be an "agenda against you" everyone can see it who is misreading everything and taking it personally.
"I was hoping BB could either correct me or say he agrees with me so that we can see his viewpoint."
Enjoy your lunch (do not misread this I really mean it enjoy your lunch)
Anyway, I've got chicken to munch on and work to do.
Twist it as you wish, everybody here can read it for themselves and then read how you want them to read it and people will put the whole picture in perspective. You actually do them a great service trying to invent a new narrative out of thin air. It actually helps underline and clarify everything.
Navis. I can't help you. Your reinterpretation of the CEOs comment sounds more like wishful thinking. What he said is very clear and not open to interpretation no matter how much you wish it. There is no reference to finding something 'better' and no such thing can be implied.
As clever as you think you are trying to present yourself,
"I was hoping BB could either correct me or say he agrees with me so that we can see his viewpoint."
A little quip that puts a rather different slant on the context. Playing the innocent. And I certainly don't take anything personally. Another false lead invented to try and give some sort of justification to ignoring the plain basic referenced truth given here for all to see. Go word play it as you see fit. Banter with Benji boy about how terribly unfair you have been treated.
BB,
I am not sure why you are taking anything personal I said I would like to understand your viewpoint and you are saying there is an agenda. Why you have to think everyone is against you we are here to discuss things and put the facts together and if the sentence means that then be it but how I understand is "they have Alternatives which they are looking at before any consideration of RI"
In my understanding "what he means here is they are analysing which alternative is better and RI is not considered as an alternative yet."
IAG didn't need 'EMERGENCY' funds on the 18th September. But the CEO did say;
"We have revolving credit facilities, we are analysing other ways of financing the group so we have alternatives before we [consider] another rights issue,"
Also just to point out in the same article he also says a clear statement "We do not see the necessity to do a rights issue and are not considering it."
Feel free to correct me please.
BB you have consistently been making the same point for 5 1/2 weeks, Price doesn't agree with you...
"The market can be right even when everyone that makes it up is individually wrong"
""We have revolving credit facilities, we are analysing other ways of financing the group so we have alternatives before we [consider] another rights issue,""
Plain - or plane - to see. One way or another, Retails investors will get stung.
get that chicken in the frier KFC, daddy's coming for his lunch!!!
You have have been corrected. If you want to try and make it sound like there is some sort of confusion over how to read
"""We have revolving credit facilities, we are analysing other ways of financing the group so we have alternatives before we [consider] another rights issue,""
then you are simply going to fail. You people have truly reached the bottom of the barrell now haven't you. Actually looking to sow seeds of confusion into what is a rather plain and simple phrase to understand.
And you say I am the one with an agenda.
offered to the RI.
offered to the Retail Investor.... to much shorthand....
Benji,
I was hoping BB could either correct me or say he agrees with me so that we can see his viewpoint.
Navis, CEO did not said they have other alternatives, he said they are analysing other ways so that they then have alternatives to a rights issue. I believe that will be a swap, debt for equity rather than a RI and if there were to be a RI I don't think it will be offered to the RI. This is a divvie paying company and therefore pension funds will not want to see the percentage of div payments allowed to increase further to retail investors, they will want to keep the divvies paid to the pensions.
..that is exactly right Navis, and Biden looked like things would never happen..
To BB
May be my english is bad but reading the line you quoted above means they have alternatives which are already available therefore when they need any funding they can tap on that.
IAG didn't need 'EMERGENCY' funds on the 18th September. But the CEO did say;
"We have revolving credit facilities, we are analysing other ways of financing the group so we have alternatives before we [consider] another rights issue,"
Why do yo think they need to disclose any alternative to anyone when they confirmed they "have" alternatives. If they need to tap on them they will and you and all of us will know it.
I might be wrong would love to get corrected.
HBR started dropping just as brent and gas was climbing steeply. Maybe the same/ similar will occur with airline shares. Could be the ii's looking for a low buy in price so the 'bots trade down to a better buy-in price. We'll see though.
Not expecting too much today, mondays and friday markets often have plenty of noise in the pipes, a bit like human plumbing lol. Too much Tizer and song at the Nearly There Arms on the weekend. GLA
"..no l still don't see your point BB.. what you say makes no sense to me and looks like deramping..."
Like I said earlier, should have gone to specsavers.
And if you seriously think after the brokers saying IAG needed a RI that IAG could continue to say absolutely nothing following intense city speculation;
Like there was no precedent;
IAG looking to raise €2.75 billion from shareholders - Head for ...https://www.headforpoints.com › iag-rights-issue
26 Jul 2020 — British Airawys parent IAG was forced to issue a statement on Friday after press speculation over a €2.75 billion rights issue to
Yeah, last time they were forced to say something in exactly the same way they had to again, and it took a whole week this time!!!!!!
Daily 100MA has held nicely ... l am looking for this to turn positive soon...
#buyingopportunity
Daily 100MA has held nicely ... l am looking for this to turn positive soon...
So, please post, with references, the conclusion of the financial review looking for alternatives to avoid a RI. Which alternative has been deployed? And again, you keep the focus firmly on a RI to ensure the wider options resulting in dilution are not on people's mind. Hey, I don't think there will be a RI, but I do think there is a dilution on the way again. Until there is an update on the review to the market, nothing has changed. Variables within different scenarios are now revealed, but the consequences on the review and impact on probabilities for further dilution is a red flag unknown.
Think I'll do a bargain bucket for lunch....
it was you BB calling that the company needed to comment...
you add no value here..!
..no l still don't see your point BB.. what you say makes no sense to me and looks like deramping...
And of course, as is seen in the headline title, the line,
‘We won’t tap City for emergency funds,’ says BA owner Luis Gallego
has single quotes so you know this is the direct line said and not a paraphrased editorial spin title.
and that was all before the good news of the removal of the Red List, Scrapping PCR's and the US opening...
they were answering for a much longer, no longer needed, timeframe
Anybody wishing to verify the article and date and quote you can click this link for proof
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/we-wont-tap-city-for-emergency-funds-says-ba-owner-luis-gallego-mnz6szjtm
Then compare the real thing to what the likes of Benji boy is trying to fool you with.
old, repetitive and boring...
it has also been confirmed last week by CFO Steve Gunning...
now please pay attention, if you followed the board you would know some of this instead of jumping in on any tick down...