Member Info for Agricore

Bangrak,

Zeus put the difference at a more realistic 40% - see:

https://theoakbloke.substack.com/i/141159396/disposed-to-change

Https://theoakbloke.substack.com/p/anic-ye-results-2023-tasty-times

Https://theoakbloke.substack.com/i/141543804/dgi-down-ytd

I was thinking 18+ years as young people.

The CEO states Gen X is the key demographic for 88 Vape. 38 - 52 years I believe.

Its newly managed product Elfbar, on the other hand, with flavours like Strawberry Icecream and Cotton Candy seems a different story.

https://www.elfbar.co.uk/elf-bar-600-disposable-vape-20mg

On a Mg for Mg basis the economics are that refillables sell for about 50% of the price of disposables; however the marginal cost is correspondingly lower (for batteries for exmaple). Zeus' analysis put it at about 11% lower EBITDA on the loss of disposable sales replaced with refillable sales.

Precisely feeks.

Also it's my impression that a much greater number of young people use disposables than the Gen X folk - who are SUP's key demographic.

Wr666,

Did they read this?

https://theoakbloke.substack.com/p/introducing-r-e-a-holdings

Hi Damofarl,

I agree the Fool article contains numerous inaccuracies. It is as though it were written by a 10 year old with a 30 minute time limit. My favourite one is how they discount $1.69bn to give $0.000435bn..... WHAT?!!!!

"The company estimates it will cost $1.69bn to cap all its wells. Discounting this to current values, gives the $435k disclosed in its latest annual accounts."

Whenever anyone quotes fool.co.uk or shares a link to it, there's a pause like in that Zoopla advert where the woman asks what they paid for their house. :)

Accies

It’s like drizzling extra virgin olive oil vs rapeseed oil over your salad - completely different tastes

According to Arix's interims it holds 5.8% of Harpoon. There was a $2.9m redeemable preference share in Harpoon it added during the period. However Harpoon's 8-Q shows shares in issue as of 07/01/24 are 16.95m (up from 4.1m) so ARIX holds a diluted 1.41% worth a £3.53m gain: ($680m x 1.41% = £7.53-£4m book). See:

https://open.substack.com/pub/theoakbloke/p/arix-merger-and-27m-gain-today

Tony,

DEC are a 24.98% yield. Have you actually read the counter argument, to DEC's alleged asset retirement black hole?

There are 20 articles relating to DEC at this blog:

https://theoakbloke.substack.com/p/dec-tecting-fact-and-fiction

There's an i3 energy article there too.

https://theoakbloke.substack.com/p/i3e-i3-energy

Using the last full year's data to compare DEC and i3e (2022):

If you compare i3e's and DEC's DD&A as a proportion of non-current assets:

DEC: $222m/$3,477m = 6.4% (15.6 years)

i3e: £34m/£299m = 11.4% (8.7 years)

So i3e has to accumulate an ARO faster.

ARO ratio as at end of 2022:

DEC: $452/$3477 = 13%

i3e: £90/£298m = 30.2%

i3e's ARO as a ratio of assets is higher.

But DEC's ARO is 80% of i3e's ARO accrued liability pro rated for depletion. (i3e don't show a separate depletion number and mix it in with depreciation and amortisation - I would venture to say they would be equal if we knew the depletion number - this is due to IAS37).

Also DEC decomissioned its wells 10% cheaper per well than i3e in 2022. i3e has to use a 3rd party contractor maybe, whereas DEC has 12 crews and 15 rigs focused on decommissioning 100% of their working lives. Income from decommissioning 3rd party wells can offset their cost too.

Using the last full year data:

i3e 70 wells / £1.369m = £19,557 ~ $25k

DEC 214 wells / $4.889m = $22.8k* (this is lower still in H1 2023)

So your argument that DEC has an ARO which is a "pitiful number" and i3e is "a little high" doesn't stand up to actual scrutiny of the facts. DEC accumulate their ARO in accordance with the IAS37 accoutning standard so there's nothing untoward or pitiful - the liability is being treated exactly as it should (the Oak Bloke article explains this further).

The final point I'd make is i3e and DEC have very different business models. DEC has a 71 year production profile to operate, shut in and work over with no drilling, while i3e is very much a drill and operate.

It's like comparing a Ferrari and a Ford Transit. Are we comparing load capacity or speed?

Hivedoff,

One should always seek to improve and learn from others, and since you positioned yourself as someone who's followed ANIC for years, I was curious to learn from you and gain insights from your posts of your "years of following ANIC".

Let's see:

We have your insight of 22/03/23 "the potential is huge is we get lucky...give it another 5 years."

What great insight you have for the year 2028 is left to our imagination, and never mind you appear to be the pot calling the kettle black, is we?

Before that we have your question from 5th December 2022 to ask:

"Is it time to cash in our warrants and buy some more shares at 28p yet?"

Hopefully you didn't cash in your warrants and buy some shares at 28p. Anyone following your years of experience would feel unhappy if they had followed you in at that peak price.

We have your thinking that at 13p in October 2022

"this should come back sooner rather than later..."

You don't explain why it should and here we are later.

Finally we have your post of 26/09/22 where you say:

"all the money Agrononics has invetsed as been used up"

After that I stopped trying to glean any insights from your years of being invetsed in Agrononics.

Https://open.substack.com/pub/theoakbloke/p/is-anic-in-a-pickle

ANIC is one of the OB top 20

https://theoakbloke.substack.com/p/happy-christmas-reader

Hi Nanopayments

I am including them. I said Cavendish didn't include them in their broker report. I don't know why - perhaps just overlooked it.

Hi Nanopayments,

First of all I think you're confusing pounds and pence. 15.8p not £15.80.

Second, the RNS 02/08/23 does quote 15.8p/share it's true.

But the final accounts do not.

In company law the final accounts would be the definitive numbers - not an RNS from 4 months before. Despite what you think.

That RNS 02/08/23 states as at 30/06 Net Assets stand at £157 million, including investments of £129 million and uninvested cash of £28 million.

The final accounts state 30/06 Net Assets stand at £168,256,998, including investments of £141,773,297 and uninvested cash of £28,093,984

.....That's an £11m difference of investments!

Cavendish's analysis of the FY2023 actuals also show a £10m difference where they agree the £141.8m of investments but think cash is £10m lower (£18m not £28m).

Nano,

thanks for your explanation.

But you've missed the point.

In the final accounts the 30/06/23 valuation has been raised from 15.8p to 16.94p a share

THEN there is are 2 uprounds at Meatable and Clean Food Group, post period, with ANIC gains of £3.9m and £5.37m, exactly as you say.

Yet we also know the NAV as at 30/09/23 is reported as 16.48p. (0.46p a share LESS than 30/06)

THEREFORE there is a drop not a rise in NAV per share.

I'll contact their investor relations to see if I can get any clarification.

Particularly that :

RNS 03/11/23 states the NAV per share as at 30/09/23 is 16.48p/share. And as at 30/06 was 15.80p

RN1 27/12/23 states NAV per share as at 30/06/23 was actually 16.94p/share.

So the NAV jumps 1.14p for 30/06 with no explanation. It also means the NAV/share drops in Q3, despite ANIC saying in interviews the NAV will be worth around "20p a share by the end of 2023" in I think interviews in November.

I'm feeling a bit irritated by what appears inconsistent/sloppy presentation of the numbers!

Hello,

I've been trying to reconcile the 30/06/23 report and particularly the valuations of holdings. There is a pie chart at the bottom of the Chairman's report on approximately page 4.

The problem I've got is either somehow holdings are magically revalued upwards by approximately the post period activity of the 30th June, or the pie chart is not as of 30/06/23.

Has anyone else realised this and can offer any perspective?

Thanks

Feeks

There is no RNS for SED dated 14/11/23.

Meanwhile your theory and speculation, or musing as you seem to prefer to call it, about an alternative explanation for the Going Concern appears to be contradicted by the news from a representative of Saietta VNA who confirms Indian production begins next month (in February 2024).

It is covered here: https://theoakbloke.substack.com/p/sed-ition-part-5

So the 50% investment alongside Padmini appears to be going full steam ahead - no scaling back it would appear.

Meanwhile for Sunderland, Ayro has received its first order from the US Govt today. Interestingly for their embassy in "South Asia". India? I read their recent fundraising to move to full production was $48m. In my mind that sort of budget translates to a facility capable of producing a few thousand a month Ayro Vanishes.

I agree we'll find out in due course whether the words from RNS 29/12/23 which states "high volume OEM relationships... which are set to utilise the production capacity they have developed in Delhi and Sunderland" means "used" vs "fully utilised"

But if you re-read it closely what else could the words "High volume relationships set to utilise the capacity" mean other than "fully utilised" (or at least heading towards full utilisation)?

For example if you have a 5 seater car and you have high volumes of passengers set to utilise the capacity it is not reasonable to think there are 5 people in that car, and if not, there are folk tapping on the window to be let in if there's a spare seat going?

Https://open.substack.com/pub/theoakbloke/p/eisb-trading-update

BMN a strong contender for 2024 at:

https://theoakbloke.substack.com/i/140201916/bmn