Member Info for addicknt

Q, you won't find me changing my mind. It ain't gonna happen.

Krusty, yes, although I'm waiting to realise some cash on something else at the moment.
The shipping industry is famous for lurching from one thing to another and equilibrium is rarely achieved. This leads to violent swings in both directions, although at the moment it's all heading in one direction and looks like being sustainable for some time. The old adage was always keep your eye on what the cannier Greek owners were doing; generally speaking they were far better than anyone in terms of understanding trends. By contrast, if you see banks piling in you can pretty much guarantee an up-cycle is coming to an end...they are utterly useless.

I'm not invested here yet but it's an industry I know and specifically the people involved in this.
Ed Buttery is a very bright and capable young guy and he has the benefit of being the son of Chris, who enjoyed great success with Pacific Basin. Chris has unparalleled knowledge of the market and contacts within it and I have no doubt he's providing some tremendous support and advice to the company - as are various other seasoned players.
This will be a great dividend play, but the main thing to be aware of is the highly cyclical nature of the shipping market. Keep your eyes on the Baltic Dry Index and take it as your guide as to whether to invest/hold or not - you'll not find a better indicator.

CD, I take your point about the hypothecated nature of their investment, but I can't believe we would agree to anything which would rule out any form of competitive tension. Can you imagine how BHP and others would react? Twigger et al would be on their bikes before you could say Jason Kenny.

CD, if I'm reading you correctly you believe a deal was done with the Chinese last year? I take it you understand to withhold such information is a serious breach of both the regulations and the law?

Quady, the NPV of Eagles Nest is $C543m.

Bozi, I agree their comments came across as posturing and said so at the time. Their future actions will be dictated by the market, not by hubristic public comments.
As for 'hidden value', in my opinion we have it in spades.

Quady, I accept this is a different situation, in as much as BHP already have a strong position, both in terms of their shareholding and the influence they are quite clearly bringing to bear.
I suppose my broader point is that they seem to regard themselves as value seekers and we fit the bill perfectly. And to reiterate, I don't see any circumstances whereby they'll have to overpay here. It's all about fair value, which in turn is dictated by willing buyer/willing seller - and there's always a price at which everyone will sell, and it doesn't need to represent an overpayment.

It seems to me that this tussle rather reveals the fault line in BHP's argument that it won't have to pay fair value.. For their strategy to work they need to assume no one else will show any interest in valuable assets. Clearly, this is bonkers.
They're in a highly competitive market with multiple players chasing the future and for them to sit on the sidelines and wait for companies to come to them is naive.
This bid is also indicative of a strategy which says they are very keen to acquire companies with hidden value i.e value which the market has not yet recognised. Sound familiar?

Yes, Whetstone.
If I were you I'd try a simple phone call - if you can find a number. But as you say, it's probably not worth it; the money's gone and the whole thing absolutely stinks.

Have you tried to contact the company?
You have until 10th October to stop the process, after which it will be wound up and all remaining property (if there's any left) etc will belong to the Crown.

RK, a quick fyi, Monday's a Bank Holiday.

The man talks much sense. I can't see how a farm-in achieves the ambitions of CGP.

RK, if you're referring to that re-post of the Confessions from the Boiler Room, I fear you're wasting your time.
I certainly first saw the thing at least eight or nine years ago and recognised it for the BS it was. Periodically it rears its head, usually when a punter feels aggrieved that his shares are not performing as he wishes.
It was tosh at the time and remains so, and I'd rather think the FCA have got more important things to deal with.

Yes, people obviously don't care about their money. Quite extraordinary.

Bubble, it may just be me dreaming this, but it does seem that more people are trading the share on very narrow margins. In fact it's really simple to move this share, as happened when I bought another 100k this morning.

Q, interesting argument and you may well be right. But BHP have placed copper front and centre of their strategy so surely your scenario will make them look doubly stupid?

Bozi, yes, it would make sense, but I feel we're in a slightly different situation, in as much as I don't believe our destiny is in our own hands. Nor do I believe BHP would have to dramatically overpay in order to secure our assets - in fact, I'm convinced they can get them at a discount.
I've often said it, but I feel we made a significant strategic error accepting BHP's money; it looked tempting at the time, but has come with significant strings. They have got us where they want us. Our management are fighting a rearguard action, but that does not mean they cannot extract a good price from BHP. It's all to do with tactics. BHP need us and we must make the most of that undeniable fact.
As for BCN you are absolutely right. I was a long term holder and had a significant amount of cash invested. At one stage I was sitting on a very decent six figure gain, but as Secker's influence became clearer the sp started to fall and I bailed out. At every turn he showed himself to be absolutely hopeless and totally out of his depth and it gives my no pleasure to be proven right. He's doing this for his own return (options, exit bonus etc) and never once did he invest any proper money in the company (it was far less than me FFS). He has failed the private shareholders and his performance, which he will record as a triumph in his cv, is in fact a raging disaster.

As we know Quady, this is about the medium to long term, so whilst you're correct about the current situation it has little to do with either 2024 let alone 2030.
The resource business is a long term play and I find it rather odd that anyone would take the gamble of assuming that it will be easier to pick up cheap assets in say 12 months time when in 3 years the world will enter a deficit of of production. Surely, any valuation will have to reflect the medium/long term picture?
I guess what I'm saying is that it would be strategically better to be seen to be paying slightly over the odds now and to secure the future rather than to wait and find the market has run away from you. And I'm not simply referring to SOLG here.
In my view it could easily be argued that Mr Cautious is actually being Mr Reckless.
Btw, the lithium shortage is predicted to show a deficit of 51% over the same period, which makes the BCN situation even more galling for its private investors. There are some interesting lessons in that particular saga.

have set out their stall very clearly which, as we know, relies heavily upon copper. According to the latest estimate from UBS the world will enter into a deficit of copper in 2024. By 2030 the deficit will be equal to 10.8mt annually, which is equivalent to 31% of the total market.
Against this compelling backdrop it's rather difficult to see how BHP will be able to acquire assets without having to pay higher prices. Do they believe any current producer will be willing to sell at a knock down value? Henry talks about knowing where we are in the "current cycle" - surely it can't have escaped his attention that nature of the cycle has changed? He obviously believes commodity prices will fall and yet the simple dynamics of supply and demand would suggest he's fundamentally wrong.
Analysts have praised his caution, but has it struck them that perhaps he's making a serious error of judgement?