Member Info for addicknt

RK, thanks for the guidance.
You are quite right, people would be ill-advised to invest here on the assumption of a dividend, unless it's a special following the sale of Alpala.

I should add that having the technical ability to pay a dividend is very far from actually doing so.
The only way we'll see a divi this side of 2036 is if we dispose of assets along the way. In other words, and this is how the conversation started, this is not an operational divi stock in anything other than the very long term, which will never arrive.

Q, no I'm not. I'm asking a professional's opinion on the structure of a balance sheet which is unfamiliar. I pointed out yesterday how a dividend can be paid in the UK when a balance sheet is negative.

I believe you are an accountant and wondered if you could provide some clarity?
The audited balance sheet is presented in a different way to that of UK companies and I'm assuming it's drawn up in accordance with Aussie regulations? Specifically, they don't seem to 'balance' it in the way we do.
However, and this is where it relates to yesterday's discussion: The company has accumulated losses of several hundred million dollars, but the 'Equity Value', as they describe it, is positive to the tune of $395m, much of which is accounted for by the Share Premium entry.
In my understanding, the fact it's positive would, technically, allow a dividend. Of course, any such dividend is unlikely for years, unless a partial disposal is made, but is my thinking correct?

Good post RK. One caveat: I believe dividends can be made in certain circumstances where an accumulated loss has been incurred and is done so by an application to the High Court.
Bearing in mind cash flow break even is not likely before 2034, my tongue-in-cheek suggestion of 2035 will not be too far off the mark and 2036 looks more likely.

DBW, yes, the Franco deal pushed them over the edge.
As I've said before, the point is that the moment we took BHP/NCM's money our fate was sealed. CGP are an irrelevance and we know they'd sell as soon as they see a decent price.

DBW, sadly the last fund raising proved the exact opposite. Yes, NM got away with it, but it cost him his job and it won't be repeated - unless it's for a piddling amount such as the Valuestone placing. BHP and NCM have flexed their muscles and we must hope that the new leadership can structure a deal with them which works for us as well - which I'm 100% convinced will be their ambition.
Rich is absolutely right, we need a a raft of good news before we raise money again, but we haven't got that much time.

Q, I admitted no such thing. I made a joke...you didn't get it...end of.
What I did admit is that I have no idea of a production schedule, but then again, neither does the company and you most certainly don't.
You incline towards two types of post; 1) complete guesswork which you attempt to disguise by stating it's backed-up by your 'calculations ', which we've never seen and 2) straightforward nonsense e.g your ludicrous assertions about the agm.
You understand very little about corporate behaviour and even less about finance. Perhaps if you demonstrated just a smidgen of humility and willingness to learn people may be more inclined to listen.
Have a good evening.

DBW, why would they agree to that? They're in the driving seat and wouldn't need to agree to anything.

Q, every point RK made in one of his responses is correct. There are simply way too many unknowns and you are completely wasting your time attempting to draw-up projections. You don't have a single answer to the points RK raised and I'm afraid to say, you have a very limited understanding of finance. You constantly tell us that this can be financed easily and dilution would be minimal, but actually you don't have a scooby. So why bother with your modelling? What purpose does it serve, other than keeping you occupied during lockdown?
As for valuations, we've had this discussion before. But to repeat your own admission; you've never valued a company on a professional basis before (please don't repeat the suggestion actuaries do it all the time when a company is being sold - they don't), so what on earth makes you think you have any idea about this? Your guess is no better than any else's and no matter how much you 'do the calculations', it's all totally meaningless - particularly as this will sold way before we get anywhere near production.

Your problem Q is that you are utterly devoid of a sense of humour and irony passes way, way over your head.
I don't know if it's going to be 2035/36/37 or 2075, but the fact remains it simply will never happen.
So, feel free to do all your lovely calculations and pretty spreadsheets - they are all totally irrelevant and a gigantic waste of your precious life.

RK, I believe he was a trainee actuary. He then moved on to fixing computers.

rk, if he did that we'd be staring at hundreds of blank posts.

Q, you're right - I meant 2036.

ET, it will be years. There will almost certainly be various restrictive covenants in a lending package which will prohibit dividend payments until certain gearing ratios have been met on a sustainable basis. And let's not forget the minor issue of needing cash to fund the ongoing exploration activities. No divis this side of 2035.
But you don't need to worry about this issue - we won't be going to production.

Q, you've repeated the assertion that production will be 2026 or earlier on a number of occasions - there is no proof this will happen.
The company has merely stated that the much delayed PFS hopes to improve the schedule. There can be absolutely no guarantee this will be the case.

Rajbury, grovel time. I think I'm wrong - sorry! I hate apostrophes!

Rajbury, suggest you look it up - you are wrong.

I meant apostrophe!

Inspiration, it isn't. It's also used as a possessive comma.