George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
Ok but what a Video to upload without an RNS to accompany it on the same day. Wow
Tamerinvestor - if you have The Doc email details can you drop him a message asking him to Verify the video on Blue Mountain.
Whatever way you look at using the Tax Losses it can only be Mercator who can either use the tax losses itself against future profits or transferred to other ECR Group companies to use against Mining/Exploration future profits. The tax loss cannot be sold as a commodity to be used by another independent company not corporately linked somehow to Mercator.
The tax loss has been created by “Mining/Exploration” within the Mercator Subsidiary of ECR. This tax loss can be used by Mercator on any future profits made in “Mining/Exploration” business sector. Also this tax loss can be transferred to other ECR Subsidiaries to be used on their future profits from “Mining/Exploration” business sector. That’s how the Tax Loss can be used solely by ECR.
However , ECR could sell its Mercator Subsidiary to another Mining /Exploration company and the Tax Loss will go with the subsidiary and become available to be used against future mining / exploration profits made by the new company owner and its subsidiaries. For this to happen Mercator would first need to transfer out or assign its Licenses not relating to the Tax Loss to another ECR Subsidiary.
However , for a JV Option to be used , a big Mining Company can JV with Mercator and assist with the funding of “Mining/ Exploration” projects within Mercator leading to generating bigger future profits to be used against the tax loss. The JV company will then share with ECR the future tax savings made by the JV.
That’s how I think it will work. There are several options to consider.
The very last statement GL said in the last presentation was “This is happening”. So that confident statement should be reassuring to shareholders.
The tax losses can be used by the ECR Group by offsetting mining taxable profits made now and in the future within the ECR group. So to ECR its saving future money spent on future Tax Liabilities generated from mining.
However, if the ECR Entity carrying the losses was to be sold for cash to another Mining Entity in the same Business Space then those Tax Losses would be used by the purchaser. That transaction would monetise the ECR Losses now for ECR.
But this would mean the ECR Entity sold would have to transfer out any valuable ECR Business Unit Licenses before the ECR Entity was sold and are those Licenses transferable.
Another idea is to JV into the ECR Entity carrying the Tax Losses so that the JV Partners and ECR would both benefit from the ECR Losses.
Big Lucrative Licences to Explore / Big Un-utilised Tax Losses - all means Big Meetings with 3rd Parties that needed our CEO to be there in person. Now we have a Big Radio Silence on the RNS Front.
All of this is starting to look exciting with the Doc dropping hints to speculate on , none of which are market sensitive. Tamerinvestor might be ramping a lilttle bit , but what he is also doing is stiring up a good discussion ahead of the next RNS.
To utilise a Tax Loss generated by an ECR Entity from the "Mining Sector" then that ECR Entity would need to make "Future Profits from the Mining Sector". ECR cannot sell that Tax Loss like a commodity but it could sells the ECR Entity thats carrying that Tax Loss. The buyer of the ECR Entity would then use that Tax Loss within its Group Structure against Tax Profits its making from the Mining Sector.
Also the ECR Entity carrying the Tax Loss could make its own Future Profits from mining its licences or Surrender the Tax Loss to other members of the ECR Group making profits from mining its own licences , all with JV assistence.
If you travel to the other side of the world to attend meetings in Perth and Melbourne , and in those meetings you discuss implementing an "Enhancement of ECR ‘s Capabilities to fully capitalise on potential opportunities which would require a Strategic Change. " You are talking to someone in a room discussing an Enhancement of ECR's capabilities on its opportunities (ie Licenses) , you are talking about a Strategic Change , you are talking about the possibility of bearing fruit from those enhancements. I think this is what Doc Holiday is referring to in his message and not the expected results from the Creswick Drill or his field trip with Adam or even the board change relating to Adam.
I think Tameinvestor is right to pen the possibility of JV's or any other kind of project financing that would provide these Enhancements. After all ECR's Licenses are too big to handle on their own.
Tamerinvestor - what does the message mean.
Nick’s visit will not change the results of the Creswick Drill so I don’t think the message is referring to the results. I think what Nick did himself off the field and in the meetings rooms “has been incredibly important and will hopefully bear fruit”.
As for standing by your beds then that’s referring to both the visit and the results we are waiting for ie ECR Operations are moving fast.
Thanks Tamerinvestor for posting the recent X message.
As a result of Nicks visit there has been an Enhancement of ECR ‘s Capabilities to fully capitalise on potential opportunities and that enhancement now requires ECR to increase its activities. All of this required a Strategic Change.
Above is the same message turned around a bit so that it reads better and helps the reader to understand what it could mean to ECR and its Shareholders.
There was a reason for the Doc’s wink in his tweet a couple of weeks ago. Wanted to say something but could not , so winked instead. The wink is backed up by his interview , again he wanted to say something but could not. We are all eagerly waiting and hoping for very good news but Tamer Investor is more vocal than others , that’s all.
The only messages I can see today are those from TS and Cashking and thats all. Great day
It can be that simple you know.
Who cares what the some posters say on this board.
Geeeee
It’s only me and Tamerinvestor who think it’s possible Haythorpe is still at ECR in some minor part time employee capacity. However , it’s not absolutely clear either way. What is astonishing is how quickly Haythorpe has disappeared from the scene after everything he said and did for ECR in relation to the Queensland Assets and the recent Blue Mountain Asset. This is why I think it’s possible he still has a minor role in ECR to help develope and be rewarded by those assets ( and Victoria Assets too ). However , having said all that ,I do agree it’s not 100% clear whether he is still at ECR or not at ECR.
It’s not been confirmed without a shadow of doubt either by RNS or in an interview whether Haythorpe is still an employee or not of ECR
The only hint that Andrew Haythorpe may of left the company was the comment from Tang in the RNS thanking him for his service and best of luck in his future endeavours. But that comment does not outrightly confirm that his employee contract with ECR has been terminated. His employee contract as CEO and guiding ECR through a challenging period of time has ended and Tang thanked him for that. But it’s possible his Employee Contract has been adjusted to a lessor role of part time geologist therebye keeping his expertise when needed and protecting his 33 million warrants he was given. It’s not been confirming without a shadow of doubt either way by RNS or in an interview whether Haythorpe is still an employee or not of ECR.
Nothing has been said in the RNS or the Interview t that Andrew Haythorpe has completely gone. He might just still be there helping with the geology on a part time employee basis which means he can still benefit from the Hurricane project that he brought to ECR and benefit from his 33million warrants.
Talking Sense.
I always agree with everything you say.
That RNS would have said he left the company as an employee if that was the reality but there was no mention. All it said was that he had stepped down from the CEO role. ECR still need him and staying as an employee would benefit Andrew considering his share warrant targets he expects to reach in the next 5 years. His employee cost does not need to be enormous but a fair remuneration for whatever expertise he can deliver would benefit both him and ECR. He comes across as a man who believes looking after all stakeholders being himself , the company and its shareholders wealth.