Our live Investing Matters Podcast Special which took place at the Master Investor Show discussing 'How undervalued is the UK stock market?', has just been released. Listen here.
Just a thought but I believe that there are some exec options expiring in May currently underwater. Supposing management were confident that they could get a price higher than the exercise price. Presumably they would pay the excess required and take the gamble.
If they did that then that would tell us something...?
After all actions speak louder than tweets!
The power situation is SA is bad for the company. Luckily what gold the gangsters ruining the power industry will let them recover will fetch more.
Who would have thought Ghana would be the great hope. Shows what a mess SA has got themselves in!
The problem is not that Eric was useless, quite the opposite. No the problem is can the next guy be as good and keep the momentum going.
Uncertainty is always bad for the share price. They need to move fast and find a good replacement otherwise the share price will drift.........
I note the have their AGM in London. Always a good sign when they make some/all execs available to interrogation by the plebs. I'll aim to attend once the accounts are finalised and the AGM called. Note to self - enquire as to the nature of that sponsorship programme...
You make a reasonable point. Don't expect a fast recovery and other things can get in the way neutralising the good news of audited accounts finally being ready.
There's always a danger that with a large family shareholding they use the company as their personal piggy bank. However from my cursory look through RNSs and accounts plus the 30p fall in the price in the last few days, there is a lot of pessimism already built into the price.
If this comes good it will imo be a slow burn...
I've been through this process with GDP and as far as the accounts were concerned it all worked out OK. Power cuts effecting operations were a different matter and for a different Board.
In the meantime quite happy with the low PE and conservative value. With a P/E of 2.5 price of 50% NAV and seemingly large reserves and resources lasting at least 10 years with a steady if unspectacular profile of steadily increasing production looks interesting. Yes the jurisdiction is not up to Western standards but if that's your priority then try ScotGold. Ha ha
I admire your optimism Evraz. Particularly liked liked your concept of "planned gold price". However, I note that your spread of estimated went from current price circa 2000 to tops of 2400.
Any scenario planning (and that is what it is) should, for balance, have an equal price downwards i.e. at 1600.
What does you model give as valuation at a pog of £1600?
Just wondering....
I must confess I never really bought into all those that avidly watched buys/sells and from there concluded MMs skulduggery.
However, investing in and following this stock I've changed my mind. Mind you I'm not going to apply it to most stocks just ones where there is a finite horizon and a narrowed set of variables with which to play with.
CNR isn't operating has a known set of reserves and resources and the unknowns are narrowed down to how the company can get sold of to the highest bidder. There are outlines for no of interest parties, indicative bids etc.
A perfect arena for game theory for which investors need to follow the principle of theory of mind.
I've been brushing up of the essentials and yes I can see MMs having a fine old time with this one.
So my suggestion is, keep a clear head and try out work out who is trying to manipulate you to act against your interests.
Let's see....
I take your point ConMan it's just the inability of the company to lay out all the facts that should reasonably be communicated to shareholders. If they'd added this extra info in the March RNS I reckon it should have saved themselves a whole load of bother yesterday.
You could be right about a quick turnaround. However, it totally flies in the face of everything that has hitherto happened in the last 2 years!
I've re-read the RNS and yes it does lay out in detail the conditions for granting new licenses and extending existing one. However, nowhere does it say the extension to the existing license is limited. That only came out yesterday. Presumably the Board's hand was forced by the article.
Given the huge amount of fath taken to get to the point of submitting the environmental report it doesn't take a genius to work out this is likely to go beyond the Feb 2024 expiry date. And then what?
Hence the share price fall was entirely logical. Top up and your peril!
You may be right about 70-80 ($/£?)being the tops but the company and management have made it pretty clear they won't accept an offer less than say $100m.
And this was a few months back. The rise in POG will have hardened their resolves...
I've been to at least 3 EGM/AGMs and eyeballed the management. Not once did they allude to the title of the land being in dispute. Was this public knowledge before today because if so I missed something?
I've always suspected something was up what with the interminable delay in getting the environmental report through but couldn't put my finger on it. Even when I questioned the management in the meetings.
Next time I'm going to be a lot more specific and ruthless. I suggest the management stop pretending this isn't an issue and lay out in not evasive terms what the real situation is. After all they've fooled themselves having bought shares at substantially higher prices than today.
Get up and front the situation now. Don't wait for the AGM because I'm only going to get more determined in the meantime
What are the disclosure rules for being on the end of one of these? Clearly an offer for the company must be disclosed to the market but if the management judge it better to wait can they delay disclosure for a firm offer for the assets?
Hopefully, due this week...?
I bought a 16p in the dark days of last December. Everybody was downbeat about the prospects for a sale. The language in the RNSs, chat on the Boards and even the body language of the execs at the AGM. The sanctions had only just been announced and long term investors in CNR were bailing out. Logic told you this was overly pessimistic but there was a nagging doubt one was missing something...
So 16p was not a steal at the time. It was, for me, and OK bet on everything I knew at the time (as well as what I suspected I didn't know)
Roll forward 4 months and a lot has changed. Clearly selling the company assets for a reasonable fraction of the discounted amount in the feasibility study is not such a hopeless task after all. The price has doubled, the upside is limited but the risk is reduced. So I bought in again yesterday 10k at 32.5 and 10k at 31.8. I think a reasonable price given where we are. I'm not expecting too much of an upside because, if so, I'm paying more CGT that I would like having maxed out on last year's allowances.
It's ridiculous that one's investment decisions should be influenced so much by changes to the tax code...
There seems to be a prevailing assumption that PE will definitely snap up THG.
Not necessarily so. PE walks away from more prospects that in follows through...
Pump up the share price yesterday with the news of a preliminary approach by PE
Dump today on truly awful results. Triple loss per share, balance sheet overleveraged and Changes in Equity back to what it was a year ago before the large equity raise.
Yes to can read the optimistic witterings of management but the accounts show to the true story.
GLA to all that hold this but I think £2 is way out of reach....
Well for the sake of your future existence you should be grateful that 20 is off the table! At least that's the stoic view
Nope we're in the valley of deficient information.
I bought way back just after the AGM in the dark days of December at the time I just couldn't evaluate whether anybody would be brave enough to bid given the ramifications on US sections were still being felt. 4 months on and the price has doubled but clearly my initial hunch was right. I've lost count - is it 4/5 or 6 indicative offers. Yes the price has doubled but clearly buyers are willing to spend the time and effort to travel all the way to see the prospective mine in person so I'd be amazed that at least half will follow through.
During the AGM Mark intimated strongly that 125m would be the minimum the Board would except. Those were dark days and you could tell from his demeanour. I'm sure that 125m minimum has in the Board's mind shifted upwards - maybe to 175m and I'm pretty sure that would have been communicated to prospective bidders before that undertook due diligence work. I.e logically I'm pretty sure that we have upwards of 3 serious bidders who know that they're wasting their time if they don't come in at a minimum figure that more or less guarantees the share price ending up north of 50p even allowing for dilution and expenses.
In short it seems a slam dunk. The only thing that could put a spanner in the works is an exogenous factor such as a market panic and/or slump in the gold price.
We'll see...
Yes, it would be reasonable to assume that any potential buyer would be tempted to put in an order to buy a tranche of shares at a price lower than we were willing to pay for the whole shebang. However, against that once they reached 3% they would have to declare themselves and obviously at 30% would need to make an offer.
I would imagine that the entities themselves would be too busy evaluating the asset to be bothered with all the hassle of arranging share purchases. That's not to say that they could be a bit of insider trading going on from members of the various bidding teams.
A scandalous suggestion? Nah we're talking about jurisdictions not so bothered about such things...