The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring financial educator and author Jared Dillian has 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.
Clear as mud. I thought I was getting it then the next sentence confused me again. Showing an example wrong versus right might have helped.
Ho hum...
"He's like aa boy with a fork in a world of soup."
Reply
“We split out the exceptional costs separately on the face of the P&L but when we calculated EBITDA we used an old formula which assumed that exceptionals were included within admin expenses, so we did not deduct them in the EBITDA calcs. We then adjusted EBITDA by adding the exceptionals back. Exceptional costs shouldn’t have been deducted from EBITDA. From adjusted EBITDA those costs were then deducted twice”
Take a chill pill man, whatever someone said, it's not worth getting so wound up over.
It is odd timing to announce this mistake now, I wonder how long they have known.. The share buy back coming in the same week, it seems rather coincidental although as Battersea mentioned the price of gold is having an effect too. We produce some silver too though I think so that should be cushioning the basket price. Hope we start to receive more positive news, in the lead up to quarterly results. Probably going to be poor in comparison to the average quarterly production last year but still very profitable.
Let us know if you do get a response please
I sent an email
Dear Sirs
I note today’s RNS mentions that exceptional expenses were deducted twice, if this is the case then wouldn’t the EBITDA be $2m higher?”
“ Upon further internal review, it has been identified that due to exceptional expenses being deducted twice, the EBITDA figures were erroneously reported. The correct figures are EBITDA of $11.3m and Adjusted EBITDA of $13.4m. This error is standalone and all other details in the 2020 Interim Results remain unchanged.”
Many thanks if you would kindly explain.
Kind Regards
Yes - I agree - that struck me too. Somebody else can ask that one from the company. I've got my hands full with HUM and trying to extract some meaningful info out of them right now...
Thanks Adam
Seems they won yet were not interested in prolonging the fight and paid them off. Probably very wise.
However, deducting a cost twice should mean a plus when adding half of it back?
This is the link I posted that caused artrader to flip and become abusive, just because he didn't like it -
https://www.rt.com/russia/516436-government-plan-ecology-fine/
"Russia backs 'radical' plan to block profits of companies that destroy environment, after fining mining giant $2bn over fuel spill"
He told us that TSG is a UK company - true, but where is the mine? Does the fact that TSG is a UK company mean it will not be affected by this plan, should anything happen - answer that artrader. You know that the fact that it is a UK company is irrelevant - you were just looking for a fight.
I asked you a question about what NN have on their web site about conforming to standards. You didn't answer. Of course you wouldn't because it proved you wrong.
Anyone reading your posts can see the sort of person you are.
It did strike me that the best way TSG could capitalise on bad news was to buy back shares. And the bad news just keeps on coming. I also am a little uncomfortable with the amount of 'private' ownership here. Memories of HGM still recent.
Once they have the million or so shares, then it wouldn't take much to take the company back private. You could look at this 'phase' of the buy back as dirt cheap. The RNS about the fund restructuring has a group of them at 55%, with 22% in the treasury... I'm sure the accident was exactly that, but they are definitely up to something now.
Something I wrote that artrader chose to ignore - "Apologies for any misunderstanding."
politeness - that's me. artrader cherry pick comments to try to paint a false picture of me.
All I did was to post some information and, because he is so intolerent, he start a campaign of attacks on me. The pompous, opnionated oaf.
https://investegate.co.uk/trans-siberian-gold--tsg-/rns/interim-results/202009290700053689A/
5. Exceptional expenses
The exceptional expenses relate entirely to the claim from the Federal Service for Supervision of Use of Natural Resources, RosPrirodNadzor ('RPN') over the payments for disposal of waste materials following a site inspection in 2016. The claim was disputed by management and was brought before the first instance court who decided in TZ's favour on 4 October 2019. Subsequently, RPN appealed the decision and the claim settlement in the amount of $1,987,000 was agreed in August 2020.
Slimeball 2 isn't very original Noel. You can do better than that. I was quite pleased with me being the Slimeball's pet rat.. you showed some though there, at least.
NTM - we have another slimeball - slimeball 2. The fun of FLX comes to TSG. Buckle up.
"Sometime later if that's ok ...?" - careful of what you say adam - if he doens't like you your reply you will get what I got just for posting information.
Someone else on this board wrote -
You caused me no offence at all bpat890 .. art trader did by posting the following :
''Meanwhile the posters on here are processing with the capacity of a plant .... full of sht''
There you are - proof that arttrader is offensive and bullying.
He wrote -"Noel, here's a few of your 'non-bullying' posts just in this past month" - why did he say that to me? It was someone else who accused him of bullying and only I used that word in quoting someone else.
In his original attacks on me me - attacks simply because I post a bit of information at which he instantly took offence - he misreprensented my words. When he can't argue about what people said, he argues against things they never said - things he made up. That is what I call a slimeball. Anyone as slimey as that deserves to be called a slimeball.
Whoa - arttrader - why haven't you attacked AdamSmith the way you attacked me? His words convey a similar cautionary note as mine did, so why don't you give him one of your smug lectures?
To go trolling me shows that artrader really has grudge. I knew that from the way he researched the article about the fine for environmental damage . His post had the know-all tone of the pompuos oaf that he is.
Now he posts comments of mine - totally out of context.
Should anyone care to look into those posts, they will see that any criticism I made of others is justified, all comments of mine are honest and any that appear rude are in defence against people who made scurillious remarks.
I merely posted a link about a mining company in Russia being fined. TSG mines in Russia and therefore it was relevant, but see how artrader tried to deflect from that by saying that TSG is a UK company. It mines in Russia and the Russian authorities said something about imposing further environmental controls on miners, therefore it could affect TSG.
Rather than seeing my post as merely information, the pompous oaf saw my post as being negative on TSG - something his bigotted mind can't stand, and so he starts this attack on me.
He needs to remember that arrogant and opinionated fools like he soon fall from grace - pride comes before embarrassment and a haughty spirit before a fall.
Sometime later if that's ok ...?
Adam - can you please provide a link or date to the RNS
Thanks
It's not the EBITDA error although that's not trivial. No it's the aftermath of the accident in vein 25. The Russians are past masters at extracting rent from these situations. If the company is at fault then obviously a proportionate fine is in order. However, I note from previous RNS resulting from an inspection of the company's operations a large bill was presented to the company due to inadequate clean-up. The company disputed this put still paid up a sizeable amount in the end.
The sooner we know what the consequences are the for the company the better....
Adam - Well done and it's nice to see some balance being stated after all 'unaudited figures' are exactly what they are and the company could easily have lost the oversight in the full year figures. They made a small fortune in the last quarter.
It's the same overreaction from the same crew that push this down and they say they are invested?
We were paid a dividend of 6p on the back of the 6 months "unaudited" results.... I'm thinking of giving 25% back
..... absolutely ridiculous price especially when we know there is a big buyer about lol!
Looking at the full year results with total Gold revenue for the year to 31/12/20 approx $73 million (12M 2019: $63.1 million)
does anyone want a stab at the EBITDA?
that did make me laugh in fairness Art Trader. That Falanx bulletin board must be about the most hateful/destructive board around.. but it's very funny too.. and without NoelS and FK1 counter posting would be far far less funny.. all imho
(I do not hold that stock anymore, in case of confusion.. a hard core punters stock imho... and, like many other AIM stocks, anything can happen with it at any time.. and often does )
Noel, here's a few of your 'non-bullying' posts just in this past month Slimeball's Pet Rat made me laugh the most, please keep up the posts -:
"David - sorry to tell you that your calculation is of no value."
"peace and quiet spoiled by moronic posts"
"Miss Dribdles has nothing better to do on a Saturday than post drivel about a Pluto Exchange. What a sad loser she is.
"Maybe they will just go away...." - possibly, like the untrustworthy, snivelling rat, NTM, did, but now he's back. We will be back when this spike collapses."
"NTM - no integrity, does not stick to his word. The slimeball's pet rat."
"Again you use another sneaky trick roly, this time the underhand tactic of misrepresenting my words."
"You came on here with an agenda, a hidden agenda. Who pays you?"
"You may try to keep you motives and agenda hidden, but you are as transparent as the others who have come on here, started off in the same polite and ever so reasonable way, but then changed to become viperous."
"what kind of sneaky trick are you playing? The slimeball goes on endlessly about going to the moon. I posted several times saying who the slimeball is."
"Over the years, the slimeball (dodgepot) has been wrong, wrong, wrong in his forecasts"
unquote
Let hope March will be as humorous
I think there is a danger that the RNS is getting mixed up with the extreme unpopularity of small goldies. When I look at accounts (I do this for a living) I generally extract them from the main IAS tables. I don't rely on standalone figure given out in the commentary so for me this is a non issue. If, on the other hand, you did rely on the standalone figures then that's different for you!
All I would say is that it is better for the company to fez up and admit an error. Obviously if a 3rd party has pointed out the error to them that's not so brave. One the other hand if they discovered the error themselves and then published the information that is indeed to their credit!
By all means keep up the negative vibes. Happy to top up below 90....