The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Spelt B O Z O......
Not obvious your intent at all Amtech..... Second large sell after BID moves up and 5 mins later (after days of silence) Amtech posts with negative sentiment...... Not a coincidence AT ALL....
Tardis, MB has stated that the Gov are glacial in working with, however that being said the deals and the work required to fulfill them is entirely new for the Gov dept. They have gone from nil partnerships to having to put board members on every deal and process plenty of legal paperwork per deal. It's like your boss at work calling you in and giving you 20% extra work and work you've never done before. They are still finding their groove in terms of what the deals look like beyond the straight up 16%, room for manoeuvre in respect to jobs and business completed within Tanzania.
Beside that I think they have also concentrated all their efforts on the lead companies to get them over the line and operational before they take on anymore work load/companies that essentially need to wait for BKT and the area's development.
Baby steps..... No point having 20 deals and none of them financed and producing. BKT and civilian population structural development with added benefit to further companies doing business from the same region bringing in more income/jobs to the local population is desirable but none of that happens unless BKT gets going.
I also see them not wanting any other company to progress ahead of their darling and well advertised project..... Especially if they ain't going to develop the area. Tanzania see this project creating a graphite district and to become the biggest producer in Africa not too far from rail to one of the biggest and busiest ports in Africa.
It will not be lost on buyers that the outbound ships will be cheap to utilise too for delivery to market as many ships leave their empty otherwise.
So that aside the benefits to ACP are real and not to be sniffed at. The EV narrative, battery narrative and now the Chinese news it's nit like the timing to progress has got worse but only better. SA bank after extensive due diligence on BKT, their product (comes from same rock as ACP's graphite) and Tanzania risk to splurge $60m more than our entire capex yet we would still deliver nearly 80% return of BKT in stage 1.
The other banks/lenders etc tend to come more quickly after the first one plunges and they see the risk they'll take on.
ACP doesn't need Tier 1 banks due to smaller capex and short pay back allows for high interest from other sources of finance. They don't need to do the same level of due diligence because Tier 1 banks have already spent 2 years doing it. Think a Aussie finance house will be too stressed lending ACP $30M given the capex /stage 1 return ratio of ACP sat next door BKT that International banks are going to put in up to $60m in one tranche.
FEED 1 has already been done FEED 2 is more confirming 1 and dinner details, the DFS is mainly changing figures, the Chinese restrictions may just put a rocket up offtakers queries and push for deals..... over next 6 months things will be very different here.
Bravo.... That seller that smacked the bid this afternoon gave you nice liquidity and a good price for the day. Out with the old in with the new.
The whole way up traders will take their X percentage and we'll encounter stale bulls as we recover previous price points.
Rover, whilst the news floating about is not directly attached to ACP it has significant implications for ACP.
Chinese restrictions on export - ACP is outside China and bodes well for US, Asian and EU interest in future.
BKT finance - and progression thereof means the district is developed that we would operate in bringing bug advantages to capex, opex and ESG credentials for all those non Chinese future buyers.
These things are now falling into place and I hope that ignites the fire in ACP.
All your posts suggest is you are a bitter trader that despite having 559 days of profit failed to action a sell and now trying to take your anger out on the company and other investors.
It was good fun in the old days Pumpky, I’ve lost count how many times I’ve bought and sold this stock........
What took you 559 days not to trade it in profit this time??
So lets get this straight Amtech's problem has nothing to do with their decision not to sell for 559 days in profit and 559 days losing position.... So how is it a problem when it had no affect on their value of shares? Or just lashing out at the one and only thing they can think of....
Merchant -If you look at the presentation with the stages of the DFS, the more costly items will be further down the line when it comes to more drilling etc. Stage one is all about pre-qualification, enhancing the project plan to increase project plant size and tonnage. This will lead to offtakes and funding in order to deliver an updated DFS and enhanced NPV. So the $2m should get them far enough down the line to add value before moving forward with the more costly parts of stage 2 and 3 of the new enhanced DFS.
NOTED.... By front loading the DFS with DFC money you create a condition in SP value that can mean less dilution or put the project to a point that other parties would help finance?. I still think any money from an offtake for no equity and paid pre DFS completion is a big ask and wholeheartedly agree that if you pull it off it would be kudos to BRES, they do sell the project well there is no question about that. I will be first to say I have often hoped for the best outcome but mostly got closer to the worst outcome so apologise if I don't think cakes come with cherry's on top.
Short you specifically said they could get the funding all from offtake and you 'thought' that is what the company was pursuing in your first reply....soooo your new line of insulting doesn't wash when this is what came out of you.
Merchant that just says you do not have to match the payments as they are made....nothing more does it say. I refer you to the 50% and explain to me what that means, no one has managed to do that yet. Was that a mistake, an error, it's not what they mean?
How is this FUD, it comes from an RNS....
The TAG provides for DFC to pay 50% of agreed costs within the Orom-Cross DFS, with Blencowe to provide the remainder. If half the costs are $5m....what do you think the other half is.... go on try....have a guess. Have you an EXACT figure in writing or mentioned by BRES how much they have to contribute?
There are lots of stories out there what it might be made up of..... but one possiblity is equity, but that was not what my original post was aiming at, but more the ones that are pumping it are serial pumper and dumpers and I merely said be careful. The mention that it could be all equity got some people's knickers in a twist. Instead of a reply that said here is the reasons why we don't think it is going to be that, I got some heresay and insults until some adults arrived. Aggressive responses I suppose are expected if someone doesn't tow the party line.
Show me this FUD then, show me were I made anything up based on what evidence I have seen? If you are talking about GROC.....I'm sorry you can't say anything postive about those figures and it is not FUD to point out that the figures are nowhere near BRES.
Clever, it also brings out information better informed hold but not often put out there, even current holders can learn something/get more background.
Shorty if you knew this information you'd have said it yourself but you didn't know or you would have said it, but your investment is based on what you have sort of heard from others.
'Wherever' was to appease you as you seemed certain it could come from elsewhere.
I've made an ascertain based on reading BRES RNS, if you have access to further information that can change that opinion from other areas I'm all ears, those further invested spend more time reading and researching and have a wider selection of notes from which to gather opinion. Educating others is not difficult, I'm happy to read facts presented, you on the other hand only provided conjecture and 3rd hand info.
Warrant holders are not cashing in at higher prices unless they felt they could lose them and were absolutely sure they would see price rises. Often warrant holders actually sell current shares to buy warrants at a reduced price.
I've said nothing of the sort. Only you seem to have a daily opinion on it....
It is only 'you' saying they misled investors and it is 'you' that gave a timescale for how long 'you' thought that lasted. If 'you' bought before the announcement or bought inside your timescale for belief of the statement the price rose AFTER that period was up. If you then bought higher than that then you did so AFTER you had already decided that imminent was going to happen.
But you have said that the statement no longer held true after 2 months. Then you had a whole 559 days in which to make your OWN decision on continuing the investment.
There is no correlation between what you deem was a 2 month misleading statement and your decision to hold through 559 days of profit.
By your own ommision this statement has had zero implications for your investment decisions because you decided after 2 months it did not hold true. At this point you didn't announce to the world it was misleading, nor did you for the next 559 days as you sat in profit.
You cannot not be a negative deramper....
Posting facts or challenging you is not deramping. The results of the PEA are not as good as other junior miner economics graphite or otherwise - fact. Derampers tend to post thoughts/ideas/conjecture of no substance, facts speak for themselves.
Instead of proving me otherwise you just reverted to name calling
Until you provide me with proof in writing that the company do not require $5m from 'wherever' to complete the DFS then you are just guessing. The official cost of the DFS must be $10m because the company have stated as such in a RNS by implying that the DFC stumped up 50% of the DFS costs. Happy to be 'proven' wrong with something concrete rather then your feeling.
I agree $5m free is a super result and having further support come finance is a super result, and there could be some twist pulled out of the bag in respect to how the next 50% of the DFS is funded, but the fact remains the worst case could be $5m paid for by BRES and one should be wary of this....hence why one should be careful of the twitter pumping and not getting carried away with 'ideas' that have no substance or proof.
Pointing this out shouldn't be something to be getting excited about, unless you want to sweep that risk assessment under the carpet because you don't like the possiblity of it....
But by your own words that misleading statement ran out in 2 months and the market has had 559 days to decide what to do AFTER that statement no longer held true to walk away.
You literally debunked your own problem.....hilarious.