Circular and General Meeting on 23 Aug04 Aug 2019 10:26
I despair. AB has made such a monumental mess of BMR it beggars belief. I can see no reason why the circular and general meeting notice have not been put onto the BMR website, other than they are trying to keep it all under the radar. I believe that shareholders will lose the majority of their remaining value if these proposals are voted through, therefore I have instructed my broker to vote my 8,550,000 shares against every resolution. Each shareholder must obviously make up their own mind and vote as they see fit. However, poorly performing Directors rely on shareholder inactivity in order to continue doing what they want. So if you want more of the same, then do nothing, if you want to protect your shareholding’s then I would urge as many of BMRs shareholders to actively participate in the vote and attend the meeting on the 23 Aug to voice their opinions. Regards AW
No problem. You can also think about it another way..... if you add the $9m to the current pre tax profit of $3.5m and multiply by 2 then you get $25m, add back the depreciation (x 2) on the plant and you get $54.4m as free cash flow, after interest. Out of which they will repay the loan at $20m annually. So they should have ~$34m to play with. They have committed to $8m of additional drilling, which is likely to continue for a couple of years. So truely free cash flow at current gold levels I think should be in the region of $25m. They have said that they will buy a new ball mill, which over the coming year will use $13m. After that I would expect dividends or buy backs to be substantial. By that time interest on the debt will be far less which should add to the bottom line. So they do have a lot of flexibility, even at current gold price levels. Even if gold went down by another $200 they should still be able to service debt, and make a profit, which is not something a lot of gold producers would be able to do. Obviously aimho.
Korg, the first qtr will have include all of the costs but only revenue for the gold produced. So run rate should include revenue for the additional 12k oz or so with very little incremental cost. So in theory for the normalised run rate you should be able to add ~$15m to these numbers. But you would the of course have to adjust down for the 62,000oz produced at $100 high gold price than currently exists, so run rate at current gold price should be ~$9m higher in these results. This does include what looks like a rapid write down of plant which would appear to be being written off over 3years. Dyor, but this is how I bread it.
A very disappointing turn of events. If you are content to sit on your arses and do nothing and watch whatever value may be saved in your investment in BMR disappear, then do nothing. If on the other hand you want to try and recover something then I suggest you join the watch. No time to be coy, I have joined and have thrown the weight of my 8.55 million shares behind it. AW
Is it known if Borrelli reads these boards, or not? If he does then should he not be holding a conference call to further explain the JV agreement to shareholders, along with answering investors questions and allaying any concerns that they have. This is what any reputable CEO would do, or is it his MO to hide and not engage with shareholders. AW.
Agreed a good RNS, hopefully it will be well received by the market. I won't be able to attend the conference call, would someone be kind enough to try and tease out of Dan what next, apart from further exploration drilling and increasing LOM; will results going forward be monthly or quarterly; will an operational and financial calendar be put on the website to remove investor angst; firm up on use of cash and timings of such use. Then post his thoughts on this BB. Many thanks AW
I am genuinely surprised that LSE allows posting by individuals using more than one alias, with what would seem to me to smack of attempted price manipulation. I have to say that I am not an expert in this area and have therefore emailed a contact I have at the FCA with the details and asked them to look into this matter. If this person is acting on their own account then I guess that is down to them. However, if it is found that they are acting for a firm/brokerage house who subsequently short the BMR when it comes out of suspension then I would imagine that this will be a different story. AW
Ok, although I'm not sure I understand your logic on cash flow, unless you think that future cash flows are in doubt. Debt repayments will in any case be covered by a repayment schedule so providing these are adhered to then this wouldn't be a problem. Future dividends won't happen for some time, at least till after the 2019 AGM, so buy backs, (absent any corporate activity) are a judicious use of FCF at his time.
OL, I think you'll find that special resolution 13 of the 2017 AGM does provide authority to repurchase. I was under the impression that shares can be bought and kept in Treasury and that the court application is to facilitate the shares in Treasury to be subsequently cancelled. As far as the exploration costs are concerned the Company has said that this will be restricted to 15% of FCF, so there is no reason why the remaining 85% could not be used for what will be circa $4.5m to take the 10m into Treasury.
Obviously the sell down by Pageant has caused some downward pressure on the price, which may continue for some time if they are exiting the position. Unfortunately we will not be aware of this for sure as they have crossed the 3% threshold and therefore no longer need to report their holdings. What I don't understand is why the Company do not approach Pageant to take this position into Treasury, picking up the shares at a low price and alleviating the pressure. They have the authority to do this per the last AGM, if one accepts the premise that they are now more or less at commercial production, and we have previously been told that they are paid for the gold as soon as it leaves the gold room, then they have the cash. So why wait? Thoughts anyone.