Firering Strategic Minerals: From explorer to producer. 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.
... Others to suggest how Infa can hold onto a majority equity stake in the IM project, first phase. I am sure they will use their £11mn expenses already used on the project as a bargaining chip with prospective funders. But Infa will not, cannot afford to, dilute equity too much at this low sp level. Will a potential offtake partner offer Infa capital to take up a greater equity share than the funds already spent would justify? Suggestions?
Way above my pay grade but some thoughts O&W
We have the £11mill already spent plus the money getting the FEED finished.
Post FEED the project valuation has to be higher surely?
https://amp.independent.ie/business/brexit/brexit-and-uk-site-closure-boosts-gas-storage-project-37402025.html?__twitter_impression=true
I found a quote from JW in the above report very interesting
"The company is in advanced negotiations with offtakers, traders who are "willing to pay to justify the economics of the project", Mr Wood said. He didn't disclose the potential customers, but said InfraStrata planned to update the market on the commercial arrangement in the fourth quarter."
Malcy blog in August
https://www.malcysblog.com/2018/08/oil-price-premier-eco-atlantic-falcon-infrastrata-and-finally/
"I say piece of the jigsaw as the funding process for Infrastrata will have to be creative whilst getting all funding partners into place conditional on each other. A partial farm-out to, say a pension fund, with long term requirements for income offset against liabilities would lead to the company keeping some of the project leaving it able to develop other similar challenges in the space. This would avoid dilution at PLC level which pension fund investors would find preferable"
A comment from Andrew Monk (head of VSA capital) I also found interesting
@InfraStrata_Plc has a very interesting gas storage asset at Islandmagee in N Ireland - I have actually been there to see it. But it requires quite complicated funding which wont come from normal institutions and that is the whole key and all you need to watch https://t.co/bI5k19JPYX
https://twitter.com/AmonkMonkey/status/1030014144794320896?s=19
Looks to me like the funding is inextricably linked to equity partners and off takers?
JW and GL obviously know a lot more about the deal structure than any of us and they have been buying at levels higher than where we are now.
Hi spudtheplumber - Great post totally agree & the directors would not have invested in the way they did if they did not have confidence in the project something very rare on AIM which is why this project is rare in more ways than one.Interesting weeks ahead - Only wish I had more funds to add to my mere 1m shares.
Just noticed your most relevant post..usually there is nothing much exciting at weekends when the market is closed.
As Spud mentions Aron really is the key what with his qualifications,his background in this very particular field and contact with a major potential off-taker.
He is the one to facilitate a major investor in the project with deep pockets and one experienced enough to take on the usual market risk.The investment does not need to dilute shareholders even more --it can be by way of a share of eventual profits from say the first two caverns or long term debt..BUT whatever he negotiates it is important that a group of significant shareholders stick together to be able to combine voting power and fend off any opportunist punter at current values which values do not reflect either the investment made to date nor the huge potential !!.
Back home now and looking forward to the coming weeks for Infa.
Just to say, thanks for all the contributions on this thread. I tend to ask awkward questions, but this response from Infa shareholders is exactly what a good bb community spirit is all about. Sharing information and opinions based on factual evidence. We will all be the better for it when this project develops the way the consensus here suggests might happen.
ATB.