Member Info for blackstout

Agree CF

This Prems turn around feels very close.

GLA genuine holders.

I must say there does appear to be several posters either acting individually or in concert to manipulate the share price on here. Boiler - room tactics effectively!

Share price manipulation is an extremely serious crime as we all probably know. It happens both at corporate and individual levels but when it comes to it the courts do not discimnate.

Punishments are amongst the highest for those found guilty. Custodial sentences and/or fines many times an individual's nett worth are not uncommon.

I’m aware the FCA are currently doing their best to stamp out the crime and are encouraging informants prepared to “blow the whistle” to do so by offering them complete anonymity. So it could be worth thinking about doing here.

I tend not to criticize individuals on the BB or rise to anyone who criticises me which you may have noticed. But I’m more than happy if not very tempted to front a referral to the FCA with names of suspects we believe are committing offences if it helps to stamp it out.

I think individuals denigrating a stock that they purport to hold should be prime suspects. Anyone who does that obviously must have an ulterior motive to manipulate the share price. Afterall why else would they. Then there's individuals acting in concert that are apparently carrying out the crime.

I believe veryone is allowed to voice an opinion be it positive or negative. Freedom of speech and all that. But no one should be making untrue and/or libellous statements in writing such as calling people liars to serve their own agenga. It’s unlawful! It all comes down to what your’e allowed to say in writing and the language you use.

AIMHO

GLA sincere holders

Can anyone help with the latest Tungsten prices please.

ACKER thanks for the link!

Good stuff!

GLA sincere holders

3 months feeding in a channel!

Come-on HOC lets break upwards!

Nice news this morning.

Onwards and hopefully upwards!

Thank you john for making the effort to attend the SM and for reporting back.

Some interesting comments there!

Thanks Mullins. Nice interview.

Could anyone point me to a reliable source for APT prices?

I've been looking but just can't find one.

Is there a reliable source to APT prices please?

Did this ever get answered please?

Guys, where do you get analyst current updates if you are a private investor ?
The ratings shown in this LSE web page seem pretty useless
Cheers

Thank you for commenting johnpwh

Please don't think I'm being negative or disruptive on AAU. Far from it in fact.

I've done a reasonable amount of research and recently bought quite few shares at a slightly lower price than we see today.

Like you though I have a few concerns. But against that I also see the potential here although it may take a little while to materialise. I just like to keep my feet on the ground and try to be as risk averse as I can.

CF as saying comes to mind!

You can appease some of the people all of the time ,and all of the people some of the time, but you can't appease all of the people..................

GLA

Paul- 280i I'm not sure if you we're inviting me to comment or not in your post. If your post was directed at me then I apologise for my lateness in responding.

You and VanVan together appear of similar views on Zenits financing but unfortunately I can't find the comment from johnphw that VanVan refers to. Although I'm not saying his views aren't the same. They may well be. To quote:-

"How do you deal with bank repayments, I would have thought that as the debt reduces the net assets of Zenit increases, or have I got that wrong?"

And

"As John says the mine asset increases in value in effect as the loan is decreased. Increasing Fixed assets & reducing liabilities"

FWIW in my own opinion whilst it would usually be common ground in a normal lending situation that as the debt reduces so the assets increase some purists might argue for legal reasons that's not quite the case here. The loan with Turkiye Finans Katilim Bankasi A.S. is quirky as we know but not just because it's an "Eastern" the repayment structure is very different to Western bank lending but also and perhaps more importantly because it's a "Senior Debt Facility" too.

Under the "Facility" in the event of a repayment default the Bank would have the legal right to claim full ownership of the securities. So in this case that's all the shares in Zenit I believe together with ownership of the swathes of land put forward by Galata Madencilik San. ve Tic. Ltd Ariana's subsidiary.

In this instance as I say some purists and lawyers might argue that the value of Zenits assets cannot increase until the full debt payment to the bank is made and until such time all securities are effectively owned by the bank. You may or may not agree with that view but I think that could well be the legal position and an acid test could be to reason what would the banks legal rights of ownership be and what action could they follow in the event of such a default.

So in this case I'm not sure the argument that fixed assets do actually increase on a sliding scale in line with the repayments.In any event I'm of the view that the liability to make the bank payments remains constant and doesn't diminish until the debt is paid in full. Although I imagine VanVan means the debt diminishes rather than the liability to pay in which case I believe he's quite right.

My previous post was on entirely different matters. In that one I was simply trying to give my thoughts on johnphw's perceived disconnect between Zenits/Arianas profits and Arianas Market Cap. For me if there is a disconnect based on probabilities then perhaps it's not as great as johnphw first thought.

I also did my best to make him aware that the current financial are unlikely to remain constant over the next 18 months or so as many shareholders might imagine not least of all because of the increase in finance costs

johnpwh Zenits nett profit can only derived from its gross income less its gross costs.

The income we're given on a Q'ly basis but the gross costs categorised by the Gold Council as "All In Costs" are incalculable from the information given in all AAU's reports unfortunately. The production cost figure or "Cash Costs" you're using is irrelevant in your appraisal I'm afraid and if used the result will be misleading as they appear to have been for you. They're only a small part of the total costs and really serve little purpose other than as a measure of performance and for benchmarking against Zenits piers..

The starting point has to be Zenits AISC's which as I say aren't ever disclosed and can only be guessed. The AIC's in this case should be derived by adding AISC's and finance costs together providing there's no tax etc

By example lets say Zenit produced 7500oz's Au in Q3 at CC's of $330/oz we know the CC total for Q3 is therefore $2.475m. AISC's must not only include CC's but also any other sustaining costs. Typically in this case but not necessarily exclusively the road diversion for example. So for ease of maths lets say other sustaining costs are the same at $2.475m giving a total for AISC's of $4.950m.

From there we must add finance costs etc to get to the AIC figure. Lets say again for ease of maths Zenit paid $1.250m against it's domestic loans and a further $1.800m to the bank. So a finance total of $3.050m which when added to AISC's would give a figure for AIC's of $8.000m. or $1067/ozAu

The nett profit in this example if the revenue was $10.120m is therefore $2.120m ($10.120m - $8.000m) and if shared 50/50 between Proccea and AA that would generate a dividend payment of $1.060m or £815k each at todays exchange rate.

AAU's nett profit generated from Zenit in turn would be something like £812k less it's own costs of say £500k to give it a £312k nett profit for the Q'tr. That's a sum similar to AAU's nett profit for H1 in fact although that was also supported in the period by the sale of the groups Lithium assets in April.

I'm not sure the results will be the same going forward as the bank finance cost are going to be more like $4m per Qtr given there's over $20m to pay to the bank over the five Qtr's stating next year and what evers left of the domestic loans. Finance costs alone are looking to be close to $700/0z Au and I'm not sure when Corporation Tax payments begin.

My example is just for illustration purposes only as the information needed is undisclosed and it's therefore impossible to join the dots. Anyway I hope it helps.

Hi johnpwh

First of all let me thank you for replying to my post. Can I also commend you for showing your support for AAU by buying more shares during a bearish period. He who dares etc.

You and I aren't quite aligned on timing unfortunately. My post deals with the immediate and not inconsiderable headwinds that AAU is facing from now until Q1 2020 when the current bank load is scheduled to end. Yours on the other hand seems to relate more to a later period when all being well Tavsan will be added to the pipeline.

If the confusion is my doing I apologise.

VanVan fast forward your figures to next year and into 2020 and the situation doesn't look quite so rosy.

Add say £2m ($2.5m) to your production costs to cover AISC's then a further £12m ($14m) finance costs just for the bank loan and your £7m profit turns into more like a £7m p.a. net loss. If that's right as things stand it will almost certainly lead to Zenit calling for further support from it's two shareholders.

To compound the cash problem at group level AAU are carrying forward a tax liability of £2.2m against profits previously which may or may not have to be paid. To add to the problem AAU will need to find cash to cover its own costs of say £1m all at a time when say £2m would be nice to explore Salinbas.

Consider also the mines financial performance this year may be exceptional but not sustainable. It's a temporary situation in my opinion brought about by not only to the reduction in costs from the exchange rate but also additional revenue through selecting higher grade ore and increasing the ROM.

Can anyone help me reason why the Salinbas acquisition was categorised as a profit by the way? Forgetting the agreement on revenue it seems that a nominal sum was paid to Eldorado but yet a £20m profit was posted in AAU's year end accounts which in turn has created a £2m+ liability.