Member Info for bluerill

and ya don't. Trying to pick away at trivial matters and catch me in some 'gotcha' moment while avoiding what's most critical, results in an almost Trumpian ability to ignore the forest for the trees. I never said BMN was going bust and I was clear that their deepest desire to invest more in enerox was NOT in any way the key to the sequence of events that followed but rather likely the immediacy of the demand to do so combined with a concerning lack of funding options which likely led to the fumbling selldown in their IES stake. What's truly relevant here, what undergirds my thesis, is how bushveld are structured financially vis-a-vis bushveld energy and the status of the latter's portfolio of investments, which I will bet a big, fat wet one you knew less than nothing about . So yeah, commentary stands.

towering mediocrity. they're done

you really have to be kidding. I also wrote explicitly that bankruptcy was not at all likely, as the company still probably has access to the equity market for a placement. 'financial distress' is not 'financial failure' and I did not presume or suggest the latter. But I absolutely stand by my thesis, now set out a half dozen times, that this entire transaction loop is a poor reflection on the state of the BMN'S balance sheet, absolutely. blew up in my face, my a**

dammit, I absolutely never said that. Someone else titled that thread and wrote something to that effect. In fact, I explicitly said I thought that level of distress at BMN was unlikely but that the entire miserable episode certainly doesn't reflect well on the relative strength of its balance sheet, etc.

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/BMN/follow-on-investment-in-enerox-gmbh/14921927

Well, at least Fortune had the good grace to highlight Invinity's continued status: '......The sell down of our Invinity stake is no reflection of any diminishing faith in the potential of the company. We are proud of its achievements and continue to cooperate on other topics, including vanadium supply, vanadium electrolyte rental and the overall growth of the VRFB industry. Our decision is rather informed by our conservative capital allocation strategy across the Group, which focuses resources on our mining and processing operations and seeks to place Bushveld Energy on a path to self-fund its future plans....'

On our way to another 1m+ share day, including 715k which seems to have gone through in one piece. Since past is often prelude, we can safely assume the seller is BMN, which would put their remaining balance below 3%. This is starting to get some notice in the market as the lion's share of trades the past few are increasingly small buys which, in my view, are positioning in anticipation of the imminent end of BMN's heavy-handed selling and a resulting pop in the price. Good riddance I say

And I gotta say, you know, before Pdub breaks my heart and deems me unworthy of anymore of his attention, that its more than a little bit creepy that there seems to be a material premium number of peeping Toms here, yappy AND silent, who seem far more concerned that I dare speak anything but rapturous praise of the great and powerful Fortune-Bushveld, than are focused on Invinity.

Well, that's it I guess. Your scintillating analysis of me wasn't the slightest bit of a self-own since I guess your double-spaced flaccid comments must be like, super relevant to the future of the 2 companies. Hey, before you go though, could you sign this quote, because its such a magnificent illustration of how essential your above-the-rim thinking is relative to my miserable attempts:

'....One thing is certain ... Fortune does nothing without a reason when it comes to money ( hardly surprising given his education and background), so having made a very decent profit from their investment here it is going to be interesting to see which project this money is for. I would like to think it is to accelerate the completion of the electrolyte plant......'

My gosh. Does he really do NOTHING without a reason?!? That it is so fierce. And it must my damned oversized ego that caused me to completely overlook his background AND his education. Thank goodness you're here to bring that to my attention! The fact that he went to Harvard Business School of course means I should ignore what I see as concerning business decisions. After all, no HBS graduate (say Jeff Skilling at Enron) has ever let his soaring ambition (and - gulp - ego) get the better of him and cause him to overextend in pursuit of empire building. Heck no.

Yes, we all know what it seems like to you. The problem is, you have no idea what you're talking about, so there's that. Meantime, if you took your head out of Fortune's butt for a second and actually tried to learn something about the markets around you, you might have noticed that the entire storage and EV sector had a broadly common 30%+ correction as interest rates backed up in the US and tech stocks even more broadly took a hit worldwide. Still, we can thank BMN's expert handling of its sell order for an lovely little extra 5/10% fall relative to those comps. Hintza - yes. very much so

Sorry, which part of my posts triggered your daft meter? The part where I explained how unusual BMN's behaviour has been relative to a normal strategic investment arrangement? Or maybe when I explained that that that giant sucking sound you hear is Bushveld Energy spunking cash on a series of as yet unsuccessful, bar one of course, investments? Or maybe it was when I hinted that after taking this capricious sell-down decision, he has chosen to execute it in the most ham-fisted way possible, such that, if it wasn't such a daft thing to imagine, it seemed purposely designed to hurt the IES share price? Yeah. Way daft....

sure, that's why

Oh, and another thing: I'm not one your little chums with a 1000 shares and a dream that you're used to mixing it up with, with your signature combination of google searches and life experiences. I'm not interested in 'bashing' or 'ramping' any company or frankly even listening to your sixth form analysis about anything. I write about what I know and I always know about I write. Listen or don't, but if you choose the first, you'll learn something and maybe even make or save some money along the way.

pdub - that was cute. Maybe you should do a bit more reading about the industry and maybe even some of my other posts, and do a lot less posting yourself. Meantime, Bushveld's actions here bode poorly for the company. I'm sharing this because I know the average BMN punter here like you will not have thought that deeply about what is happening.

fat - fascinating info on you and your holdings, and I'm very aware that there a lot of people here who love Fortune and BMN, but 'circumstantially' there is nothing symmetrical here. This is a terrible look for BMN, full stop. Whether the Firm is looking to raise cash quickly or Fortune is just a d*ck, or both, healthy companies don't liquidate strategic stakes in a partner after only a couple of years when that partner has met or exceeded all its early milestones. Like ever. And to add to the overall direction of play, a genuine industry heavyweight in Mick Davis shows up in the sector, but by taking a stake in FAR, not BMN, aaaaand has expressed genuine admiration for IES. Nope, sorry, the weight of evidence is pointing in one direction and its away from Bushveld.

At first glance, I thought the 142p closing price was a spoof since the closing bid-offer was 135p-138p, but sure enough, nearly 650k shares printed after the close at that price. We can be pretty certain who the seller was and if so (it's so), that would be another 1% off their benighted holding, putting it tantalisingly close to 0. Very good news indeed.

To be clear however, I am not in any way suggesting that Bushveld will go bust. They clearly have a healthy core business and will doubtless be able to raise equity as a last resort if needed.

james - Hold the snark. BMN, and Fortune in particular, have put a lot of effort and capital into Bushveld Energy and IES is the only undertaking that has come remotely close to a successful outcome. Meantime, despite that success being evident to all the partners as still being in its earliest stages, BMN's sell-down of their IES stake has been spectacularly unprofessional and consistent with the behaviour of a seller in some real level of distress. Sorry, but that is where the strong circumstantial evidence leads.

I'm so glad this issue has been picked up over here as I've focused mainly on the other board in explaining it. BMN probably isn't going bust, but it is almost certainly a motivated seller of its IES shares as its 'Bushveld Energy' project has clearly not gone to plan, and IES appears to be its only real success. Therefore we can safely assume that BMN had been leaning relentlessly on our shares as they have found it difficult to raise capital any other way at present. The reason I am calling the bottom in our share price here however, is because BMN are finally down to a size that an institution can easily absorb and I believe, very shortly, one will (also the general sector - AFC especially - are beginning to (significantly) recover.)

Call me pernickety, but I hope listeners appreciated that Kevin's calculation of free float was a tad ambitious. To take a (very unscientific) poll of completely unverified group of people on a Telegram chat to 'determine' their shareholding and then claim that that total is somehow not part of the free float of the company (on the basis, I assume, that if you're on this social media group of Zoe enthusiasts you must somehow be committed to the share for life and therefore not part of the 'free float'), is NOT how that number is calculated. Overall, his point still applies of course - between the Schraders, John Story (especially after his inevitable loan note conversion next week) and the 2 CEOs, one is looking at a very reasonable estimate of long-term, locked-up holding that is pushing towards 40%, before a single institution has yet to arrive on the share register. However, including that final constituency - basically current, devoted retail holders, unscientifically determined to boot - was excessive.

Not exactly a seamless analysis, but one of the panelists on Zak's Sunday 'Roast' show hits some of the existing and forthcoming high points for Zoe, particularly on its massive potential in the alternative smoking/smoking cessation space (starting at 36.58) and uses the massive lead Zoe have in that niche as the cornerstone to a spirited defence of the premium rating the Company maintains over Love Hemp (LIFE), at 46.31, despite the latter having booked real revenue already.

https://www.share-talk.com/zaks-sunday-roast-28th-march-2021-analysis-of-stocks-markets-by-traders-and-investors/#gs.wtfiru