Member Info for Billyboy2fromiii

Guvvi,

No sure what you mean.

Naturally, hitting production guidance at 100k rather than 110k will result in a higher AISC than if hitting the higher end of production. Lower production equals higher AISC and vice versa. So not sure what you mean with your statement "impossible to meet the upper end of one based on the lower end of another?"

BB2.

Guvvi,

......... Due to lower contracted volumes of material being mined than was anticipated in the mine plan for Q3, our current model for full year production is forecast to be at the lower end of the guidance range of 100,000 - 110,000 oz, and AISC at the upper end of the guidance range of US$1,250 - 1,350 per oz of gold. The Company notes that, all other things being equal, meeting this forecast is based on the mitigation measures, as described above, being successfully implemented by our mining contractor, bringing mining volumes back to contracted levels ....

They are forcasting PRODUCTION to be at the LOWER END of guidance of 100,000 to 110,000 (so approx 100,000 oz) and AISC to be at the UPPER END of guidance of $1,250 to $1,350 (so approx $1,350).

AS such, Q4 will need production of 30,623 (100,000 - 22,781 - 24,494 - 22,102) at approx AISC of $1,000 ($1,350 x 4 = $5,400 - $1,494- $1,386 -$1,520).

If they manage that in Q4, that will throw off approx $24m of cash assuming avg gold price of $1,782.

But is it possible? Q3 2019 gold poured 30,484 AISC $849, Q4 2019 gold poured 33,892 AISC 839 , Q1 2020 gold poured 30,282 AISC $875.

So yes, it is possible. But is it going to happen.........

BB2

Associated maintenance issues and supply chain bottlenecks for replacement parts have led to lower plant availability and as a result W Resources has adjusted its full year production guidance to between 650t and 750t of concentrate.

The Company expects Q4 2021 production to be greater than Q3 2021 production. However, production volumes will not reach the T2 run rate until Q1 2022.

BB2

Obstando,

...rather than asking it here on a daily basis....

I have only posted once on here before today since 1st October so have NOT been asking on a daily basis.

So much was made that the Q2 update (along with results to 31st March) was not important as it was pre roll-out and it was better to wait for Q3 being post roll-out (along with results to 30th Sept). Yet, here we are and it is now said that Q3 is not important.........

I fully get the positives of the recent RNSs but investors were told that we would get quarterly updates..... so I believe that it is right to ask where they are.

Obstando,

Fully get your post as regards the future and not the past...

But...

Are we getting a Q3 update (as promised) or not ??? It is now 18th October. I, personally, would have thought the promised Q3 update would have been with us by now.

Any thoughts specifically about this would be appreciated.

BB2.

DRB & Cranleigh,

For the record, I fully agree with your interpretation of the Viridian agreement.

Buy for 1p within a five year period once shares hit 60p (full entitlement) or after 12 months (but limited to 25% each 3 months (quarter).

I do not believe Vas is correct as regards the 60p.
I do not believe Blue is correct re the 25% being every year rather than every three months.

BB2.

So who held 3.75m shares to be able to sell them? Can’t be that many.
Thoughts?
BB2.

Vas,

Congrats on your "insurance" top-up yesterday. Your investment strategy here has been better than most but you obviously had to pick an entry point for your top-up. Good call yesterday, I would suggest. I agree with you, I personally am not certain that we have seen "the bottom". It depends, in my opinion, upon when we get the Q3 Update and what is says.

Today could be a "dead cat bounce" or it could be the start of the reversal. I don't think we will know the answer to this until we get the Q3 Update. I have topped up on previous "bounces" and this time prefer to await the Update before adding further.

BB2

Hi DRB,

No worries. Good of you to give your thoughts backed up by some figures. Better still that you have (in my opinion been realistic (some may argue conservative) with your assumptions). You working are pretty similar to mine. With your explanation, I understand your 30% figure now.

I know it has been stated that 50% margin is the aim but I am happier to use my 30% margin until proved otherwise (especially looking at the stated margin in the audited accts (yes I know they are historic and based upon low revenue...). Obviously on low revenue, my deduction of admin costs makes a big impact upon net profit. Significantly improved revenue will obviously negate this effect.

Obviously we are both guessing with our assumptions but I feel it gives us a basis to work on rather than the "finger in the air alternative".

Q3 Update will hopefully give us a bit more "meat on the bone" and then obviously the interims for period to 30th Sept.

Regards, BB2.

Good morning Obstando,

I have not included the share based payments nor the finance exit penalty and only included 20/21 actual stated admin costs within the £2.15m.

However, if you believe that these admin costs can be trimmed further by £1m to say £1.15m (not sure myself)...

DRB original model of 3,000 stores, $5 per item, 30% margin, 2 items per store. Gives gross profit $3.25m (£2.4m) less reduced admin costs £1.15m, gives net profit £1.25m. mcap £39m, p/e 31.

Assuming the same 2 items per day, $5 per item, 30% margin, over 12 months. But let us use an average store count of 6,250 (I have taken an average of the 10,000 suggested April 22 and currently confirmed 2,500) gives $6.8m (£5.04m) gross profit (rev less cost of sales). Less reduced admin costs etc of £1.15m would give net profit of approx £3.89m. At mcap of £39m, p/e of 10 (online sales still not included in this calculation).

Increasing the sales to 3 items per day on the above scenario would give $10.25m (£7.6m) gross profit. Less reduced admin costs etc of £1.15m would give net profit of approx £6.45m. At mcap £39m, p/e of 6 (online sales still not included in this calculation).

BB2.

Keepdreaming,

Yes, you do make a valid point. I was merely trying to help DRB with an obvious error in his workings.

For balance..

Assuming the same 2 items per day, $5 per item, 30% margin, over 12 months. But let us use an average store count of 6,250 (I have taken an average of the 10,000 suggested April 22 and currently confirmed 2,500) gives $6.8m (£5.04m) gross profit (rev less cost of sales). Less admin costs etc of £2.15m would give net profit of approx £2.89m. At mcap of £39m, p/e of 13.5 (online sales still not included in this calculation).

Increasing the sales to 3 items per day on the above scenario would give $10.25m (£7.6m) gross profit. Less admin costs etc of £2.15m would give net profit of approx £5.45m. At mcap £39m, p/e of 7 (online sales still not included in this calculation).

I trust this gives more balance to my prior post to DRB which was a mere correction to his workings.

BB2.

Keepdreaming.

Yes. DRB did indeed use a 30% EBITDA figure. As you may be aware, this is the reflection of the profit margin on the product and will provide the gross profit. You then deduct admin expenses etc to get to new profit. EPS is in relation to net profit and hence p/e ratios.

I have posted a link for you to help understand

https://thinkout.io/blog/ebitda-vs-net-profit/

So I did not misread and am certainly not trying to spin negativity.

BB2.

So indeed

Lionel,

I fully agree there is plenty of (recently reported) things to be positive about.

However, management were also very positive in virtually all previously released RNSs. As per my post to DRB earlier, what we really need now is a Q3 Update RNS that clearly demonstrates that their previous positivity was well founded and that they can prove this via QtoQ revenue growth and store count numbers. Let us hope that they deliver this RNS next week (no reason not to?) and is confirms positive figures both for revenue and store count. If so, hopefully, we can then draw a line under the recent negativity and move forward.

BB2.

DRB,

Thank you for returning the discussion to relevant CHLL issues.

Your calculations are pretty similar to mine. I have used the current 2,500 store count but happy to go with your 3,000 (in truth this will hopefully be higher as at 30th Sept). However, just one thing. The p/e figure should use Net Profit rather than Gross Profit. On that basis, if we deduct 2020/21 Admin Expenses of £2.15m ($2.89m) then we have net profit of £0.27m ($0.36m). This would give p/e on current mcap of £39m of 144 rather than 16. Obviously your figures do NOT include any online sales either in US or UK.

As you suggest, it is very early days. We need to start the journey somewhere. The first thing (in my opinion) is to (hopefully) see a QtoQ revenue growth for Q2 to Q3 along with a store count number that shows the roll-out is progressing. Should we get this then it will (hopefully) lead to a further QtoQ growth in January. It is such growth that will warrant a high p/e rating.

Fred,

Any news from the AGM?

"ringleaders"...

Ummm…….... I wonder who they were ???

BB2

Craig,

Unfortunately not! The Co cannot release new news at the AGM before such news is available to shareholders via RNS. I do not personally think the AGM will make any difference to current sentiment whatsoever.

The only thing that will (in my opinion) change sentiment is "hard" numbers from a "proper" Q3 update. We need to know;

What revenue was received in Q3. Was it just the $2m orders received for US stores (plus a bit of US and UK online) or is there other orders that have been received but not yet disclosed.
What is the current US store count. Is it still 2,500 due to roll-out being delayed or is it more than 2,500. Are we now above the previous 3,500 July target. Are we on track for the 10,000 initial target for early 2022.

It is this information that I personally believe will change current sentiment rather than anything said at the AGM. If we get a good Q3 update then hopefully we will see the sp begin to climb. If we get a poor Q3 update then I personally think we will see the sp get "hammered" and we could possibly see 9p (in my opinion) before we get Q4 update in January.

The recent news is encouraging but I feel that "hard" numbers are required to change sentiment.

Obviously the above comments are based upon my own personal opinion. I could be completely wrong and Fred could be proved correct with his £3.50 by Xmas prediction.

Good luck, enjoy the ride!

BB2

BB2.

Unfortunately,

Craig,

The Co have not broken down the split between Chill and Zoetic.

However, I am sure most shareholders would agree that is it Chill that they see the major potential in for the future rather than Zoetic.

The Zoetic range looks very good and is quite well diversified (oils, gummies, cosmetics etc) but this market is pretty saturated so (in my opinion) is will be difficult grab a large market share to make significant £.
The Chill range (smokes and pouches) has very good potential (especially in the US) to make significant $.
Lots of work still to do and very much (in my opinion) a medium to long term investment rather than short term. However, with patience (perhaps lots of it) hopefully we will all do well from our investment in CHLL.

Feel free to ask further questions.

BB2.

Craig,

Currently just in the UK via the website. Good service, usually next day delivery.

Plans to be available in stores in the future but not currently.

BB2.

Craig,

If is is the Chill products you are after then it is Chill.com

Here is the link

https://thechillwayuk.com/collections/all

There are some product reviews there as well.

Again, remember the discount code.

BB2.