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.
LoL @tomcat. That 22% (of small creditors) relates to the $2.5m in escrow.
only 22% of the creditors now... how much does that bring the $227m down to...
Perhaps... LoL. ;-)
i know where you’re coming from... but i do think it is in there already... although not subject to the effects of the jrp... it’s on the balance sheet... i suppose what is shown is how we would have liked to pay it back... which will be adjusted to reflect how we have agreed to pay it back...
@tomcat I think you are right that the LBO $135m is what is under discussion with the banks since:
===[
1.1.33. "LBO credit": is the non-competitive credit Credit Facility Agreement: concluded on 06 December November 2013 between Zamin Amapá Brasil S. A. and Intesa Sanpaola SpA, Hong Kong branch (as agent on behalf of certain creditors), in the original amount of one hundred and thirty to five millions of North Americans (USD 135. 000. 000,00), LBO credit is secured by certain fiduciary guarantees and therefore is not subject to the effects of recovery Judicial.
]===
as my understanding is that Intesa Sanpaolo, HK, is one of the three banks we are negotiating with.
It would be beneficial to us if this were included in the "JR Creditors" row, but I just don't buy it. Partly since: "is not subject to the effects of recovery Judicial.", and partly since we know it hasn't taken a hair cut and the amount which did was around R$900 - though I don't fully trust the below!
"Zamin Mineração to resume mine operation in 2021" (Sep 03 2019)
http://www.valor.com.br/international/news/6418273/zamin-mineracao-resume-mine-operation-2021
===[
Eduardo de Abreu Sodré, a partner at law firm Donelli, Abreu Sodré e Martins Advogados, which helped draft Zamin's recovery plan, explains that the company's original debt was R$1.5 billion, but creditors reached an agreement to cut approximately 30% of that amount to R$900 million
]===
This also means that the "Provisions" is not the amount under discussions with the banks.
Ob.
in answer to the other part... i think the $49m is in the jr creditors... along with the $135m secured banks... and the other $50m we found...
gerald $135m... (already paid in ore)...
indo sino $50m...
intesa sanpaolo $135m...
banco $50m...
($235 : $227 lost in translation and rounding)...
If the $51.6m provisions aren't anything I mentioned yesterday ($49m to JV or that secured to banks) I wonder if they are the NPV of the interest payable on the various liabilities?
aye... so we lend it back to them... ;)
Indeed - don't want to be paying tax prematurely! LoL.
;)... i see that yes... which is netted to about zero... or less...
I don't see how that can be the case, the provisions are in the "NON-CURRENT LIABILIITES" section. My take is that the cash flow from the stockpiles are in the profit and loss years 2020 and 2021.
it is... and in answer to part of your question yesterday... i’m thinking the provisions is the proceeds from the stockpiles...
@tomcat Yesterday I had a good half hour or so looking through/comparing the tables to the originals and couldn't spot any obvious mistakes or transcription errors. Much easier to see the bigger picture now! ;-)
impressive set of projected accounts sheets there tc... ;)
look forward to the cash flow and hopefully npv...
ob... how close is this to your numbers you got from the jrp...
Hi MrC .....Depends on the Covid result? ......Just saying.
OOPs sorry Barksy - I have upset the rose tinted specs bus it seems ! But when is this debacle ever going to end ????????????
I should go and have a covid test Mr C. Your sense of smell has gone :)
I'm sure the guys have spent some time on their spreadsheets but we are now in Feb 2021 and we still have no sniff that this Amapa deal will persist. If I owned a Bugati Veyron I could surmise how fast it would go but I dont have one so its pointless. My point being all the spreadsheets in the world wont make this happen if it isnt going to happen.
That's an impressive job @Tradecraft!
Anyone got any thoughts on what the R$185.8m of "provisions" relates to on the balance sheet, which is $51.6m @3.6 FX?
Perhaps it's the amount owed to the banks outside of the JR value of R$818m ($227m @3.6 FX) under negotiation, and therefore can only be estimated (provisioned)? I presume the $49m of Sino's which will be repaid to our JV (my understanding!) is included in this JR amount as I can't spot it anywhere else, unless the $51.6m is the $49m (with interest?) - but in which case where is the money owed to the banks? And where does the $135m we spotted a while back fit into this? @tomcat!? ;-)
Ob.
Thankyou for sharing your hard work with us Tradecraft and Obs , that must have taken ages ....
Exciting times ahead , court watching and ship spotting going well..... Cadence turning point.. ?
Here's a link to my updated DEV PRJ Financials file. It now includes the Balance Sheet from the DEV PRJ document, in addition to the P&L. The transcription is challenging with lots of blurry text. Years 2031-2035 are still not quite right, but the errors are small and I won't have time to spend on this for a while, so I am posting now warts and all. USD conversion pages use the implied BRL/USD FX rate of 3.6 as per posts on this thread earlier today.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Lh3xuSNrQXvoS7Xc4YN2bONjDDBuW1lq/view?usp=sharing
Cashflow statement will follow once my eyes have recovered from deciphering this second sheet.
@mrcautious yes I do as a matter of fact. Quite out of date now and I need to refresh it to reflect recent placings and disposals in our investee companies. Happy to post once this is done, some patience required I'm afraid. The short version is that the cumulative project potential is more than enough for me to remain invested here, independently of whether or not Amapa happens. DYOR etc...
@Tradecraft. It is indeed very complicated, especially as we don't know the half of it! LoL. I'm hopeful the scoping study will do a good job of promoting the potential value of the Amapa project for KDNC. In fact I've mostly given up on estimating an absolute NPV and have recently fallen back to additional NPV over baselines. e.g. my post on 15 Aug 2020 14:07 estimated an additional pretax NPV8 of US$1.6B for the following iron ore prices:
http://www.custeel.com/en/csi.jsp
===[
Date Seaborne index 62% Fe fines Seaborne index 65% Fe fines
2020-08-14 120.65 128.40
]===
when they are now considerably higher - especially the more important 65%! :-)))
http://www.custeel.com/en/csi.jsp
===[
Date Seaborne index 62% Fe fines Seaborne index 65% Fe fines Seaborne index 65% Fe pellets premium
2021-01-29 157.90 183.20 52.80
]===
Probably more like an additional NPV8 of over $3B now ;-)
Ob.
Do you guys have a spreadsheet for the company value if the Amapa deal does not happen - if you are all spreadsheet aficionado's you should have factored this into any equations you may be using it is after all end Jan 2021 and we seem no nearer to closing this off !?
From your transcribed tables. For example at full production 62% revenues are R$198,720k. We know this is 0.9Mt and @ $61/t therefore the exchange rate is:
FX = R$198,720,000 / ($61/t * 900,000t) / = 3.62 (likely rounded to 3.6)
And once you know that it's easy enough to work out what price was used for 65% Fe:
(R$1,265,184,000 / 3.6) / 4,400,000t = $79.87/t (likely rounded to $80/t)
DIP C financing is $85m and it looks like R$306m in the table. 306m / 85m = 3.6 (in fact I think this is where I first deduced it)