Member Info for addicknt

one thing I'd like to see and that is Secker dipping into his wallet and buying a meaningful number of shares. He's certainly earned enough from the company over the past three years to be able to afford it.

sorry, slightly mis-understood your point. And I agree with you.

smickster, I'm sure they don't, but we possess the jewel in the crown, so they're hardly likely to ignore it, are they? And I rather think their 6% investment gives the game away somewhat; don't you?

Newboy, raising finance for a valuable project isn't a binary thing i.e if you fail once it doesn't automatically imply you'll fail next time. And we should always bear in mind the fact that we've already raised a very substantial amount of money.
My concern at the moment is the share price. At these levels equity finance has become deeply unattractive and I suspect we've gone as far as we can in the debt market.
So the question is; what can be done to raise the share price? Secker's answer appears to be to sit and wait until we see an uplift in the commodity price. Personally, I'm not convinced by this argument. What happens if it doesn't rise in the way he's predicting?
I don't know what the answer is, but I can only assume Secker isn't sitting on his hands doing nothing. The institutions and his board wouldn't let him. He must be working on something to enhance shareholder value. If he isn't, he should hand over the reins to someone who can.

Agreed Newboy...good board; crap share price.

bluegrass, yes, SOLG has been a real boon and is certainly making up for the situation here.
I think an awful lot will hinge on what Secker says in October.

long talked about consolidation process amongst miners has commenced: Barrick and Randgold to merge. That will certainly give competitors something to think about.

Why did you imagine it would be?

Longinvest, I can understand your cynicism, but it's not entirely factual.
The company has received commitments for a great deal of money and has already drawn down $25m.True, the placing was a disaster, but PS appears to be relaxed about this, and bear in mind it was only part of the funding.
As for your second point, do you really believe the demand for lithium is going to do anything other than rise? And before you refer to new projects coming on line, I suggest you do a bit of research into the matter. You should also take note of the vast reserves we have here.
All of us long term holders have been frustrated, but I suspect we share the company's view of the longer-term prospects. As I said yesterday, more patience is required, which is a commodity in short supply amongst retail investors.

Coop, you are quite right, although I attached no significance to it due to the fact it's so opaque as to be meaningless.
For example, were I him, I'd have set out clearly what these 'preliminary site works' entail. Does it mean they're sweeping the yard, or are they actually digging the footings?

I guess the point I've now reached on this investment is that I'm having to re-adjust my timelines considerably.
I first bought in December 2014 and thought of it as a two to three year hold. I've now extended that to four to six years.
At one stage, in value terms, this was my largest holding. It has now been superseded by SOLG and I'm focussed much more on getting a substantial near-term return from that.
I'm still wholly of the belief that we will be rewarded here, but we'll need to extend our patience.

Coop, interesting for a number of reasons, not least of which is that he hasn't mentioned this to anyone else (as far as I'm aware) I'm not for one moment suggesting he didn't say this to you, but simply that this should be publicly available info.
It all comes back to my point about the need for absolute clarity, which, let's face it, is not exactly one of his strong points.

So, we're starting construction this month!? Of course, this is excellent news...but completely untrue...unless Secker forgot to tell us.

I like this company, although I admit to having taken my (very) healthy profit already. The one thing that always concerns me is when a company states; "we are trading in line with management expectations", when most of us have no idea what those expectations are.
My guess is that the forecasts will have been quite conservative, at least I hope they are. Which implies to me the business has not hit the heady growth rates previously reported. Sure, the company will be growing top line at a good rate, but will it be the same stellar increase? I'm also a bit wary having read the reduction in growth rates at ASOS and other on-line fashion retailers.
For me, this stock is a "keep a careful eye on" at the moment. I'm convinced it will be successful, but I'm of the view that the valuation is probably up with events at the moment. Having said that, no doubt I'll be proved completely wrong.

schlemiel, debt is only dilutive in the way you describe if the company defaults under the T&Cs of the loan agreements.
Otherwise, I agree with you that funding would be a big ask as well as very expensive. I also agree that we will be bought out before we get to that stage.

seedcorn, one potential target to keep your eye on is Telum media. It's only relatively small at the moment, but was set up by Michael Webster, who made a fortune establishing and then selling Gorkana. It's in the space that Sorrell has said he wants to expand into. There is also a coincidental connection: Webster's father is David Webster, he of Safeway and much else beside. Webster senior's corporate finance advisor and close friend is Rupert Faure Walker.

Coop, I'm intrigued, but I'm afraid I don't reveal my email on a forum such as this; far too many weirdos out there! (not you, of course!)
Did the reply manage to explain his contradictory statements? This issue is really niggling me.
The next quarterly update is due in October and, absent anything beforehand, he will need to make sure he nails the question. In fact, as far as I'm concerned, the update will be the most important statement from the company I can think of to date. He has to make it absolutely clear where we are going and how we are going to get there. His usual waffle will simply not cut the mustard.

Interesting that no one had a view on the issue of the B share (unless it's already been much discussed and I missed it, if this is the case I apologise)
I'm trying to work out whether to invest in the business and want to consider all aspects, which includes corporate governance. It has been many years since I've seen a company come to market with a two tier share structure. It was common place at one time, but as governance became an issue, institutions put pressure on companies to drop it and most of them are not permitted to invest in companies that have them. So this situation intrigues me. Clearly, those institutions which have invested, don't mind, but this is very much contrary to modern thinking. For my own swat analysis, it remains a negative; but is it sufficient reason not to invest?

Given his recent experience, I can fully understand why Sorrell wouldn't want to suffer the same fate again, but in the modern age I'm really quite surprised investors were prepared to accept it.
In essence, he appears to want his cake and to be able to eat it. In other words, he wants the public market so that he can offer tradable paper to acquisition targets, but also appears to want the ability to ignore outside voices.
Obviously, provided things go well, no one will complain. But what if things don't?
What are people's views of this issue?

No, and I take it you didn't either?