The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma 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.
Sensible view, Ashton. Hopefully you will see some cash come into the business via asset sales, or at least a tangible update, before too much longer.
LWHL - You ask: "All things considered, including the cash position, would further acquisitions be welcome though, Ashton?" Absolutely not is my decisive answer.
Please refer to the note I posted on 14 Apr 2024 at 20:46 and addressed to you in which I asked: "Will JAY succeed in selling any of its assets this year (in other words some kind of INBOUND partial or full ACQUISITIONS of JAY's assets)?"
Please note I used the words "INBOUND ACQUISITIONS of JAY's assets. I did NOT say JAY acquiring new assets. Please see my next post.
"Bluejay reaffirms its commitment to transparency and integrity with its shareholders and will continue to prioritize clear communication, accountability and ethical conduct"... how ES and RM can say that with a straight face is beyond me!
Im not sure why people keep referring back to the previous bod in such a way as to suggest anything they stated or promised holds any value whatsoever. The only material we should now be focused on is what s provided by the current bod whether you like/ trust them or not...they now have the wheel
All things considered, including the cash position, would further acquisitions be welcome though, Ashton?
IMO, you would be better off selling the non-Disko assets, as the BOD have said they would back in December, if memory serves correct, and then, should these sales result in a strong cash balance, new acquisitions might then be more logical, to my mind anyway. Especially in a challenging lending climate such as this one.
The risk of biting off more than one can chew comes to mind here too.
But look, you seem to remain bullish and good luck to you and fellow holders.
LWHL - In the note you posted at 07:39 today you said: "NO PROGRESS on selling this, or any of the OTHER assets, one can only presume." Fair enough, that's one way of looking at an unknown situation.
You will recall that in the note I posted on 14 Apr 2024 at 20:46" and addressed to you I asked: "Will JAY succeed in selling any of its assets this year (in other words some kind of inbound partial or full ACQUISITIONS of JAY's assets)?"
Eric Sondergaard (MD) says in today's RNS: "As Dundas is fully permitted, with a valid mining license, we will continue to review critical aspects of the project, as well as potential value adding ACQUISITIONS within the country."
The reason for choosing to use the word "ACQUISITIONS '' in my note was not random. That said, we have to wait and see what JAY actually meant by "ACQUISITIONS". In the meantime, all we can do is engage in positive, negative or neutral (open-minded) views on the matter.
Please do your own research.
I think for the likes of the majors, they (with the support of their shareholders) position themselves to be ready to move quickly when the opportunity presents itself.
It is in that sense, an affordable numbers game for them. Not to mention the quiet benefits of building and retaining governmental contacts/networks, which neither they, nor I suspect, government officials in the various jurisdictions, deem a waste of time.
They plan in the decades ahead, and have the financial means to do so. Unlike the pre-revenue explorers.
If Kobold go ahead and drill, then fair enough about it not necessarily mattering who walked away from who back then.
My interest in JAY is not intense. As a former fairly long term shareholder, which I have been fully transparent about before, I guess I just want to urge caution to potentially new or even existing shareholders about this outfit, who, for whatever reason, may have overlooked the massive number of red flags here.
And provide some counter balance to the bullish comments which generally outnumber the bearish comments I think.
But I will leave it there now and await news on Disko or the asset sales.
I hope that you and your fellow holders at least keep chasing the BOD for clear and specific updates on this (and the cash runway IMO). It is your company, after all and they are meant to work for you. GLA.
LWHL - You say: "To your point about AA: Yes I am, although I am not sure whether it was JAY who decided to go with Kobold ahead of AA. Furthermore, AA's willingness to pay those licence fees does not really signify much. These big boys have deep pockets and to them such things are pocket change."
Taking the first part of your comment, the important point here is that AA was interested in Disko. Who walked out of the deal is secondary. It seems AA's offer included a multiple of the dollars committed under the KoBold deal and for a longer tenure of time. Despite such an offer, JAY decided to go with KoBold. Forward wind this video to 8:45 and listen to Rob Edwards talking about Disko and a major miner without mentioning the name AA - https://tinyurl.com/3uxdwk8e
Taking the second part of your comment, it may be a pocket change for AA but they also have shareholders to whom they are answerable. Besides, not only AA has been paying the annual regulatory fees but has also been carrying out field activities. Why would they go to such trouble? Besides, what is there to gain by staying in Greenland if AA is not interested in developing their project, wasting other peoples' time including that of the Government of Greenland?
I am tempted to say your interpretation and reasoning of AA's reasons for staying in Greenland is somewhat tenuous.
As for your comment: "I am not a shorter, nor looking to get back in here cheaper than the current price etc" - I have never regarded you as a shorter but have been intrigued by your intense interest in JAY despite being a non-shareholder or any intention to become one. You also come across as a decent guy!
I was being somewhat flippant with my lol comment. I understand the pretext of additional listings. As the history of this company shows, there have been plenty of incantations and I am sure there will be more in future.
Whether any non-employee shareholder ever sees a return on any investment in any current or future listing, is an opinion that we will no doubt have to disagree on.
To your point about AA: Yes I am, although I am not sure whether it was JAY who decided to go with Kobold ahead of AA. I remember lots of confidence and excitement over Rio and Dundas. And shareholders were led to believe that was a shovel-ready project, in case anyone here has forgotten. The track record of this company speaks for itself.
Furthermore, AA's willingness to pay those licence fees does not really signify much. These big boys have deep pockets and to them such things are pocket change. If having such names on board or in partnership offered anything solid, then CHF and presumably HZM would look somewhat different. There are plenty of other examples over the years, too.
Not suggesting that traders might not be able to make profits in any of these names, including JAY at one point or another, but you have made clear that you are fundamentally an investor here, Ashton and so I approach our discussions from this viewpoint, not greater fool theory trading probabilities.
FWIW, I am not a shorter, nor looking to get back in here cheaper than the current price etc. GLA.
Thanks for the reply and here is my response.
Point 1: "If KoBold are going to drill Disko this year, it will need to be announced, and work commenced, PDQ. Mid April already, tick tock."
My comment: If it is going to happen at all, it will need to be announced by May and no later. I have been advised by JAY that the closing date for field activity licenses is in May. I have checked on the MSLA website. The only field activity licence that has been granted so far is to the miner Itinnera Solutions ApS.
Point 2: "If Kobold does not, then why would anyone else look to partner up here?"
My comment: Why is Anglo American still a large licence holder at Disko (7,379km²)? Why is AA paying annual regulatory fees running into circa £4m to the Government of Greenland? They have not walked away. Did you know that AA was in negotiations with JAY over Disko before JAY decided to go with KoBold? I must say I am somewhat surprised by your question. Maybe you did not know all these facts.
Point 3: "Similar to point one really, although less excuse if they are not relying on a third party to do the actual work."
My comment: Funding the drilling activity at Kangerluarsuk will be the main issue here. Drilling rigs are already in place.
Point 4: "Will JAY actually succeed in getting anything for any of them? Sure, it takes time to negotiate stuff."
My comment: We don't know whether JAY will succeed in selling any of its assets but glad you acknowledge that it takes time to negotiate. I know for a fact they are talking to buyers about the assets and one is from farther afield. RM gave the timescale as June 2024 in his interview for an update on the sale of assets (I presume you have seen the interview). So please be patient on this issue.
Point 6: "Why the need to keep opening new listings all over the place? Just use the current one, lol."
My comment: You can't use the current listing if you really understand what is involved (lol). You will need to completely decouple Disko from JAY and list it separately as a battery metal miner for it to be attractive to the market. This means a separate listing of Nikkeli Greenland A/S with the consent of KoBold or someone else if they buy off KoBold's 51%. Should this route be followed, the current Bluejay listing will continue with JAY's existing assets until they are sold off except Kangerluarsuk. I have it on good authority that JAY will keep Kangerluarsuk. Please go back and read a note I posted on the benefits of listing Nikkeli Greenland A/S.
Point 7: "This is the easiest one to answer. Barring something unforeseen, like a miracle perhaps, involving some of the above happening to deliver some serious upside, then it will continue to involve heavily discounted placings, before perhaps one final death spiral finance deal, when no more retail money can be squeezed, and then pop."
My comment; That's one view. There can be other views.
The bottom line is best to wait for the update!
If KoBold are going to drill Disko this year, it will need to be announced, and work commenced, PDQ. Mid April already, tick tock.
If Kobold does not, then why would anyone else look to partner up here? If it is that good a prospect, then why would K take the risk of losing it?
Point 3: Similar to point one really, although less excuse if they are not relying on a third party to do the actual work.
Point 4: Will JAY actually succeed in getting anything for any of them? I voiced my doubts on this a few months ago I think it was, when some of you were putting forward your own various calculations. Sure, it takes time to negotiate stuff, but based on the track record of the BOD here...where is the evidence that they have pulled off some terrific asset sales beforehand?
Point 6: Why the need to keep opening new listings all over the place? Just use the current one, lol.
Point 7 is the easiest one to answer. Barring something unforeseen, like a miracle perhaps, involving some of the above happening to deliver some serious upside, then it will continue to involve heavily discounted placings, before perhaps one final death spiral finance deal, when no more retail money can be squeezed, and then pop.
At some point, the words of these directors need to actually lead to some solid outcomes. This is hardly a young company, for goodness sake. GLA.
LWHL - Under a different thread, you said: "I am amazed at your continued enthusiasm here, Ashton. It is against all logic and weight of evidence that suggests your faith is entirely misplaced."
What weight of evidence? Do you have the answers to the following questions? If so, please share them and state your evidence. I am waiting to find out the answers to at least some of the questions in the update from JAY followed by an interview with Sondergaard.
1. Will KoBold drill at Disko this year?
2. If KoBold does not drill at Disko this year, will JAY bring in a major miner as a partner for Disko?
3. Will JAY drill at Kangerluarsuk this year?
4. Will JAY succeed in selling any of its assets this year (in other words some kind of inbound partial or full acquisition of JAY's assets)?
5. If the answer to (4) is "Yes", which asset(s) will be the target for the acquisition(s) and how much money will be raised?
6. Will Disko be listed on the stock market?
7. How will JAY fund its business over the next few years?
I wonder whether other JAY doubters would care to answer these questions.