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.
MJM3 - How do you play golf with no hands?
"St last a educated person with the correction information!" Hahahahahahaha!!!
Now answer my question.
Theo
To give you an example HZM is seriously undervalued against its future return rate. It was valued poorly when its financial studies were completed, but doubled on agreement of bank funding. It has only gone up 5% post funding when the company raised capital from creating more shares and completing off take agreements although overshot by 30% before doing so. At some point HZM will shoot up in value when they actually delivered product.
Pensana arrived on the scene in the UK much later then HZM. However, both shares along with Rainbow Rare and many others in that space shot up in value because of the commodity price increases. Both gave up a lot of their gains although the volatility of Pensana was greater in both gains and retreating back down. I therefore disagree with PRE share values being given a higher value equating to future earnings until funding terms are known and agreed. Once that becomes known and real construction starts with contracts awarded and work programmes being delivered then the value of Pensana goes up. Furthermore if the Pensana share prices rises it is not uncommon for the share price to fall in year 1 of production. This can be due to teething issues with routine processing or its costing in the delivery of a full processing circuit in all of the operational plant. If targets are met the company share price goes up in year two depending on market demand conditions. It gradually fits with a PE rate and its post tax earnings.
I presume you read the last AGM minutes of Pensana before they deleted them from their website a few weeks later. It gave an insight on what the Board would agree to do and what was acceptable targets in agreeing the finance for both the Angola mine and Saltend. If you had read them it would explain why the correct share price should be mid-80's at this particular stage.
What would be critical is the announcement of the first bond for Saltend as this would re-rate the company. All the gains afterwards could be smaller in comparison.
Hi Theo, for further clarifications. whilst i said thin volumes, i did expand that the thin volumes were allowing someone to keep the price at a level that they need. i have my own ideas why. but as I've said before, i dont post without backup
The Greek Lizard! I am not a shorter, I have no masters, so I guess I must be a saviour sent from god. I'm not concerned about striking PRE from the history books, as you know I reckon Atherley will do that himself. Maybe you could have a proper sensible go at explaining why the market values PRE at £180m when the FEED outcome is a £2.5bn PV. Put together a serious analysis of the discount and what that discount is telling people. Don't just sit there and throw out insults or complaints about bizarre behaviour, show us if you have a brain. Mumbles has had a go and come up with thin volumes as his hypothesis. Surely you can do better than that?? If the task is beyond you just say that you haven't a clue, there's half a dozen posters here who would probably recommend that as a reply!!
Stupid argument Theo, IF that argument was correct ~ Why then has the price not tanked below 80p ?
You, Me, and everybody else, knows that what Mumbles is alluding to is going to happen fairly soon.
The Number shall be 80,
Theo - The only problem is the one experienced by unsuspecting retail investors who have little understanding of what is going on behind the scenes. It is obvious to everyone else precisely what is going on.
The sooner your accumulator bosses have achieved their goal the better. After all, when that happens there will be so few shares held by anyone other than LTI's the SP will explode.
Theo, here’s a hypothesis for you. Nobody is selling, certainly not at this price. The volumes are so thin that when some shares do come on the market, they are price takers. Whilst there aren’t may willing buyers, there aren’t any willing sellers either. Consequently It is easy to keep the price at a level that anyone determined enough wants it to be, without to much effort or risk. At this stage in the game the share price is irrelevant until there are willing buyers and willing sellers. We’ll see in the next few weeks, possibly days….at the moment I’m quietly confident we’re on the right. Time (and not a lot to go), will tell
China, there is one problem you cannot escape. If you are right and I am wrong the SP wouldn’t be 80p. The company has published its FEED. $3.5bn PV. That’s right, the company has done all its analysis and told the world it is worth £2.5bn or approximately £10.00/share. The market has had a little s****** at the analysis and decided 80p is the mark. That is a totally inescapable fact and one that is entirely consistent with my analysis.
Theo, Why can you never get your Facts right ??? Every time you post you destroy your own credibility !!! now I am not going to tell you where you have made a howling error until you answer that Question I asked you a couple of months back.
Now questioning David Hammond's ability/integrity, but then agreeing that the Peer reviewers SGS are highly credible does not make any sense at all. To then suggest that SGS is a mere name drop is ludicrous; let me assure you SGS would not hesitate one second in exposing a Company that made any false claims in their name.
Raising Murchison & Leyshon again ! You forgot your usual Berkley ~ Why ? because it is not the failure you claim, PA's vision of a new Uranium producer, finding a deposit and proving it up is finally coming to fruition as the Greenies are debunked.
The only things that stink around here are you and your buddy Mouthwash,
Theo - I can smell ATF, M&G, Artisan and planning permission granted. And it smells pretty sweet to me.
China. This is where you start to slip into very dangerous water. Drilling and results analysis by David Hammond. Would that be Dave Hammond formerly of Pensana and MP?? For a BFS, the normal route, the analysis would be conducted by someone genuinely independent, not an old mate of PA. SRK yes, highly credible, but I don’t believe they have published their own analysis? Certainly nothing I could find, indeed the only mention was in Dave Hammond’s script. This is the problem with this company. Whenever you start to scrape back the layers you start to find stuff that just doesn’t sound right, everything’s too off pat, mine to magnet, world beating, $3.5bn PV, money back by next Christmas, the identical script for Murchison and Leyshon. To me nothing passes muster, there is a very unpleasant odour about all of this.
MJM3 - 'I’ll bet anyone on here the share price will not go past 90 on Monday and will be back down to 80 again on Friday week !'
I reckon you are probably right. Your accumulator employer continues to benefit from weak retail investors throwing the towel in whilst carefully 'managing' the SP at the 80p mark.
At some point though, your employer will have achieved their goal and there will be even fewer shares held by anyone other than LTI's.
A better question therefore is, when they take the brakes off where will the SP go then?
Theo, At last you are starting to put forward forward cohesive inquiry "drilling results, all the ore assessments, to be happy with Angola, the Erin Brokovich thorium solution, the track record of the management, the completion guarantees, the off take commitments," I assume it is because you no longer wish to be associated with Dumbo and Mouthwash ?
Drilling and Results analysis were performed by a very experienced and competent Geologist David Hammond under JORC Standards, If you doubt those you should not invest in ANY mining Projects ! The "Ore Analysis" was verified by SRK, again highly respected Consultants in the Mining Industry, they also did MP and are one of the few ROW companies with RE expertise. Angola ? Well they are reported to have a legal framework at least as good as Australia and have clearly demonstrated that they choose to improve, also they are significant Investors in the Project so they have a vested interest in its success. The Thorium issue is a Furphy, The companies proposed remedy of burying it in a stabilised form will be a great improvement on the current situation where Th is sitting freely on the surface able to be mobilised by any strong breeze. Track record of Management !!! You must have written that prior to todays News... All your innuendo of these last twelve months has been blown out of the water ~ Pensana is now well in front of its Peers, most of who had a three or more years head start. You should know better than to raise Completion Guarantees before any contracts have been exchanged or even awarded you can't have one without the other, and as for Off-take agreements, read the Company releases ~ 50% of Production is already spoken for and people are knocking at the door !
I look forward to more of your prompts, which allow me to respond in detail to your questions ~ Keep it civil and I will be happy to respond to any further queries that you may have.
MJM, If you can't handle the response, stop throwing stones at others. You joined this forum under false pretences, have been found out and will now be served your just deserts.
Hey, MJM3, I'll take the wager, you may well end up back on the street !!! May flick you a penny, just hold your 'I HATE PENSANA' placard high above your head, that way I'm sure not to miss you ??
Theo, just read your rant. The missives such as wel f**k me backwards, toys and pram sprig to mind. I would go and get a chill pill or something you might be about to burst a blood vessel
Theo, meets the objectives to validate the project, not to find any particular part of the construction project or administration costs. I fairly confident that the discussion with the ATF didn't include the magnitude of any incentive or bonus payments when determining the quantum of the award
Theo - Forget about that. What do you reckon to PRE getting the planning permission - great news hey?
MJM3 - You should still sell.
So Mumbles, you think £4m, a sum which exactly covers the share bonus to three directors announced last week, is “just about right” to “meet the objectives”. The company needs to find $500m. Assuming that in this age of rocketing costs their capital costs really have gone down. The company should have just one objective, namely to find someone to believe all their figures, all the drilling results, all the ore assessments, to be happy with Angola, the Erin Brokovich thorium solution, the track record of the management, the completion guarantees, the off take commitments, and cough up $250m to finance Longonjo. So how does the £4m (if indeed they are getting £m) tick all the boxes????
MJM3 - Please do us all a favour and sell your shares. Think about it - there is a chance you will lose all your money, not just some of it. Aren't you better off getting out with some money rather than none?
Thank you for your insightful comments - they will always be treasured !
PRGgc, that's exactly what it is. affirmation that all the boxes have been ticked. I don't think i said anywhere it was a pointless sum. i said that the grant should be the "minimum required to meet the objective". i believe this is just right.
MJM3 what's Theorist's evidence, well your own half witted
posts and, Theorist, do me a favour and take MJM3 by the hand and you both take a flying leap ?? The ATF maybe inconsequential to you but it is essentially part of the ESG certification requisite in the scheme of things especially for the 'Greener than Green Bonds' issuance.
Should you both behave, then I may well thinking of you as I toast your ignorance at our forthcoming celebrations ?? turning soil with our golden spades ??
Aim of the game, think you'll find it's correct. As a UK tax payer I'll be pretty p*ssed off if it's any more