Member Info for aadvark

Interesting developments as FCM ‘monetise’ an asset and POW’s stake is reduced to below 5%. Looks as if it could have been a suitable opportunity for Minestarters if that was far enough along. Any thoughts or insight?

Based on the Rick Rule interview, buy backs generate somewhere near an instant 100% return.

So if capital is being retained for other types of investment, they must be pretty spectacular opportunities. Let’s be positive about that prospect!

There are positives - amongst them First Class Metals starting to rise from the depths - but the absence of a meaningful share buyback remains a huge disappointment.

Just £1-2m on a buyback would get Sean and team a really good chunk of time and enhance NAV/share simultaneously.

I guess we’re due the second of the new-style quarterly updates in 8 weeks or less, so a little more patience required!

For the avoidance of doubt, there have been plenty of errors - at least my fair share - but Alba was one of the worst three.

For those holding now, things may prove different - I hope so - and this isn’t the place to be over-negative. The GROC holding is an increasingly solid underpin to Alba’s value.

Marc001 - to be fair GROC is at, or close to 52 week highs and rightly so. They have consistently done what they said they would do, have non-dilutive funding and credible management.

I retain a meaningful holding and am positive about the future. Ironically I came to GROC through Alba which I would rank as one of my three worst investments ever. My hope is that the gains from GROC will ultimately cancel out the losses from Alba.

No. GROC IPO was 10p and the price only dipped below 5p in 2023. So needs to more than double to be an ‘ATH’.

100k of shares a day will ‘move the needle’ quite quickly if sustained every day. It is sufficient to tilt the balance between sellers and buyers and will give confidence the downside risk is minimal to buyers ‘on the fence’. All good!

The re-start is indeed very good news. Hopefully it will be a sustained daily programme. If that’s not the case, perhaps will get comms this time around about the ultimate scale of the intended buyback - that would be an useful alternative.

Overall I really like the way the company is evolving with an increasingly diverse portfolio. But not executing the buyback programme definitely shows a management ‘blind spot’. It can be done consistently every day, regardless of upcoming news, results etc if set up appropriately.

So I’ll take another ‘patience pill’ and make some small top ups whilst this share price range persists.

For me

The company broker(s) execute the buy back. That would normally be considered ‘arms length’ and able to continue regardless of background activity. So unless there’s a £10m+ deal in the offing and the cash is needed the current situation is indeed baffling.

Apparently not! I remain a solid believer, but surely some explanation or update re the buyback strategy is long, long overdue. Even if just ‘ we’re looking at other options for the cash which may offer better shareholder value’. Come on Sean!!

The Company made the case for the buy back very clearly and strongly. Rightly so. What has changed? That’s the RNS I feel we’re owed.

I hope there is a plan - it isn’t obvious! My primary concern is that the most effective buyback programmes are typically consistent - purchases at a modest but consistent level, day in, day out.

Getting very frustrated about the unexplained and now extended curtailment of the buy back programme. The buys are done on an ‘arms length’ basis, so upcoming news is not an explanation. Anyone have some insight?

A share buy back of any significant scale (£1-2m?) should have a material impact here, with normal trading levels only a few £000 daily and a relatively modest free float and mcap.

Plus - and it’s a big plus - because the share price trails the NAV so significantly, every share bought back increases the NAV per remaining share. It’s a perfect set up.

There is a clear process underway to allow the return of capital to shareholders, with a timetable for the legal work now published and plenty of financial scope left to do something material.

To me, the Apex investment makes a whole lot of sense. It is a direct investment in pre-production mining and gives exposure to the same risks and opportunities (commodity prices, mine life extensions, delays etc) whilst adding the likelihood of longer term revenue streams.

I was invested in Trident and although disapponited it was sold earlier than I expected the outcome was positive. With the same team behind Apex we are in good company, the jurisdictions they invest in are sensible and the fact they are currently a private company is, for me, a non-issue.

I don't understand the 'casino bet' criticisms at all. Investing in Apex is much less speculative than straight exploration. If the criticism was that POW are playing it too safe, that I would understand.

Or scroll down to the first article on this page (next to picture of red seats) - pretty comprehensive and confirms the 2.95% short in total:

https://www.marketindex.com.au/asx/ggp?src=search-all

100% positive - chance to better connect the share price to its underlying value and simultaneously continue to grow NAV/share.

More than enough cash to do this without compromising future-facing investments.

A £1-3m speculation is just fine. But a similar size share buyback is essential.

The key issue here is to make sure shareholders benefit from POWs success. So whilst new projects are essential, using 10-15% of the available capital on a buyback is necessary. Let’s hope it comes.