Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
BlackSteel, in the UK, IG has stopped offering buys or spread betting of EVR and POLY. They will only allow existing positions to be closed. I suspect it will be the same for you, so your only option if you want to buy may be to open a new account with a different broker - there must be a few still allowing trades. I opened one with HL and managed to buy on Friday.
melonhead, yes I think it would only be temporary. My main broker is IG but they have stopped offering EVR (and POLY) for buying shares (and also spread bets - not sure about this though). They only allow closure of existing positions. My guess is this will be temporary and they will add the companies back once the war is 'over'.
If you can't buy through your broker/platform, just open another account with one that does offer these - I opened one with HL but there are others offering EVR.
Just be aware of ISA rules if your existing account is an ISA. My HL account is just a share account so will have to pay CGT if over my allowance (would be lovely if EVR makes this happens!!!).
At the risk of sounding American, the decline in this SP is 'insane'. From mid-Jan it declined from c600p to early Feb to c444p and now... Looking at the fundamentals, it just seems inexplicable and the political risk seems misunderstood. Have dipped my toes in here with a whole 1445 shares for either a short or medium term hold, as profits seem inevitable! Feel it should be safe to top up during the next few days, especially if a ceasefire of sorts can be agreed.
Even if suspended, which I think is unlikely, by the time it is tradeable again, the situation will be much more stable. It seems to be a win/win situation whether you're averaging down or new to the share.
Am I missing something big here?
The RNS says it goes ex-div on 5th May, so plenty of time to get shares if you aren't currently invested.
Just phoned IG and they won't let me buy online or by phone. I asked when they will allow trading again and the answer was- it depends. Not surprising really but feeling frustrated that I can't get such rock bottom prices.
IG is not accepting any buying at the mo. Is it the same with other platforms?
Not online on IG - no online deals possible - you have to phone them. Will keep an eye on this and possible set a phone order at limit.
If lots of retail investors can't deal, does it mean all the action is by II's? I suppose if various platforms only allow selling it would partly account for why the price is crashing so hard.
I can't buy on IG at the moment. A message comes up saying they are only accepting closing of existing positions. Very frustrating! Price at 11:16 is 81.44p - unbelievable for a company this size.
I'm a little bit overweight in this share already. However, momentum in the business is still positive overall and today's drop seems completely OTT, so made a little top-up of 600 shares at 175p. Maybe events in Ukraine are increasing volatility even in unrelated shares??
Made my third and final buy of a whopping 2000 shares a bit earlier on today's drop.
I try not to predict what the SP will do in the next few weeks, apart from go up! Still think the company is well positioned and that the retail sector and this SP will recover well over the next few months: aiming for SP to reach £1 this year at which point will probably take some profit.
Ted Baker results today are hopefully another positive pointer for retailers.
Probably not superfluous, even when looking at covid alone. The ongoing US trial is a home-based one, whereas this one was for the hospitalised and it seems the use the steroids has impacted the readout of the efficacy of SNG001. (The RNS seems to imply another study is needed, which will obviously be a cost in time and money.) So it may be another useful drug to have in the armoury along with others to fight the virus, especially as the delivery method is different.
I also understand it could be used in other illnesses like asthma (happy to be corrected on the detail of this).
I'm sitting on a massive paper loss so don't feel I can risk averaging down. If you're thinking of investing here for the first time, it's certainly high risk and may need to think longer term but at least that risk is now reflected in the SP.
Good luck whichever way you decide.
Yep, absolutely endorse what has been said about ndn's posts. I think they've been balanced and informative and has been unfairly singled out as a deramper.
My 4k investment is now worth 550 (a lot for me) but I knew this was a largely binary investment. Just have to accept the paper loss now, which is making me glum. SNG is down but possibly not out; I will not be averaging down as this is far too risky until the dust has settled and what potential assets remain can do. This is not a case of buying on the dip either. Looks as if it will be sitting in the bottom drawer until positive news or the risk of insolvency - I know they have 25m cash but how long will that last?
Is this really true? I didn't realise that they fell foul of retrospective FCA regulations - if so, that's an utter disgrace, to put it mildly. Retrospective regulation or legislation should only ever be used in extremely rare situations and preferably never. How can individuals or companies behave in a way that follows rules that don't exist in the present? It's an impossible task and more the mark of non-democratic societies.
Amigo's interest rates were never excessive as far as I could see compared to other companies in the market, so their malfeasance seems to be mis-selling - but was the mis-selling due to the retrospective rules? Unfortunately, we live in a compensation culture which brings out the worst in people and encourages them to chance their arm, which muddies the waters for those with genuine complaints and valid claims.
I very much hope the company survives (I am invested here so am obviously hoping for selfish reasons for the SP to recover) as it does provide a very much needed service; there will always be economic roadbumps to add to the woes of the less well off: the pandemic, inflation, interest rates, commodity prices and political risks.
A small example: I drive a 17 year-old car and now need to fill up with E5 petrol as E10 will damage the engine - today I paid £1.70 a litre for this. That's a 17% increase compared with E10 and let's not forget the home heating cost increases that will be with us very soon.
I exited JOUL last in 2019. Still seems a fundamentally good business with short-term bad news, so have dipped my toe in. Bought some at 76p 4 days ago - I know, I overpaid considering the price action over the last few days; also, just topped up at 62p.
It just seems massively oversold at the moment. Not really looking for massive profits; maybe 30% over the next 6 months as it sorts out the problems stated in the RNS, plus the removal of remaining covid restrictions.
From a couple of previous cases, Samsung like to brazen it out and if the case goes against them, will appeal if they can.
If NANO patents are validated in the IPR by the PTAB, I think Samsung has already agreed not to contest them again at the trial.
Not sure what defence that really leaves them with, so they will have to judge whether to carry on in the hope of a favourable result in the trial, vs the possibility of being found against with wilful infringement, which I understand can mean triple damages. Presumably they would also have to pay NANO backdated licencing fees as well (or is that included in any court award??).
If they lose the court case, they have appealed in other cases I believe, but surely they must have valid grounds for that and what could those be.
So, do they break their habit and make an out of court settlement if they lose the IPR? Seems like sensible damage limitation to me; I just can't see that they have an ace up their sleeve for the trial.
There are worrying signs, it's true. Why did the CFO leave? Why have the IIs got out?
We may not get the answer to the first question and it's hopeless to understand II motives because they can have myriad reasons for changing their stance, some of which may not even be directly related to this share.
I suspect the RI dilution RNS was designed to placate the FCA but potential 95% dilution plus the above factors have caused a lot of PIs to cut their losses or protect profits.
Future events haven't changed though: redress creditor vote and SOA court case. I think both will go through this time, as creditors are being offered substantially more, while the alternative is wind-down and a lot less returned to redress creditors; the previous grounds for the court not sanctioning SOA 1 won't be there. The shareholder dilution and increased redress and current SP should mean the FCA will not object this time. This what's keeping me in.
The other worry is how much money can they raise from a RI is the SP remains at current levels? I expect there'll be a lot more price volatility in the absence of IIs and probably lots of day trading.
I'm 77% down currently but am prepared to lose the rest as although it will hurt, I haven't bet the farm on this. The risks are still worth breakeven/profit rewards.
I'm new to this share but it looks as if LTH have suffered a lot. I'm in three similar shares myself and I know the sound of dilution as share value goes through the plughole.
I may be missing the point here but does an offer of £100m equate to a 7p SP? IE £100m/1380m shares. There's no guarantee of the deal of course (esp with the capex needed and the current political situation in Ukraine) and I suppose holders could vote against but a c4p SP now seems a good entry point.
Thank you.
Thanks for the link, Nanonano.
I almost got to the end before my non-scientific brain fried. Not only do the methodologies quoted by Samsung/Green seem utterly incompatible but even the end products aren't the same. Some methods produce nanoWIRES or nanoRODS but not nanoDOTS. Any end products seem to be inconsistent in size and quality and unable to be produced on an industrial scale.
On page 74, I actually laughed when I read this: “Q. And in your opinion, you didn’t consider the melting temperatures of those molecular cluster compounds. Right? A. It wasn’t something that I particularly paid that much attention to, no.” Other comments by Green also point to a lackadaisical approach, as if to say, Samsung are paying me to do this but really, I know it's all nonsense.
To me it smacks of Samsung's tactic all along, which is just to string things out for as long as possible, delaying what seems to be the inevitable win for NANO. IF the PTAB upholds the patents and dismisses the petition, what further defence grounds could they have in the court case? I'm trying to keep my confirmation bias in check but failing miserably.
I believe our patience will be rewarded and handsomely!
I only bought SNG in December, with just 1600 shares, after being reminded of it by an ex-work colleague who did very nicely from it last summer. I would have invested more but am already in other shares like NANO which I feel are high risk but for completely different reasons and sectors. Despite being late to the show, I've invested for all the reasons explained by some great posters on this board, which helped convince me of the investment case - thank you all.
It seems a very well-run company and I don't believe they would have partnered Ashfield or gone ahead with US recruiting without some inkling of the P3 results.
But I have to be realistic - this is pharma and volatile. I suppose the other possible P3 outcomes are inconclusive results or even 'failure', either of which would cause a big drop in the SP, so am trying to mentally prepare in case of this - tin hat at the ready.
Reading the RNS, they only mentioned results in 'early 2022' - I tend to read this as first quarter. Is there a reason why people think the RNS is imminent?
Apologies if this is a stupid question!!
I've been reading a few articles and the main points for me were... Looking at historical movements of gold price relative to inflation and interest rate changes. Extrapolating that to the current situation, it predicts the gold price will be c$7000/oz by 2030.
Fiat money printing by central banks on and off since 2009 also means that many countries' central banks hold insufficient gold reserves. Even the country with the biggest bank reserves, the USA with about 260m oz only covers roughly 2% of its (admittedly humungous) debt. As inflation now seems to be flagged as more than transitory and the Fed expecting to raise interest rates this year and next, central banks may be looking to bolster their reserves and this could help maintain and increase the gold price.
As well as this, gold and precious metals miners are generally unloved. Again, looking at the US, much of new money entering the markets over the past few years has gone to tech stocks, while capex in broad commodities has declined since 2015. This has been made worse by the popular Index ETFs pushing more retail investment into tech like the 'FAANG' stocks. Commodity producers are only receiving about 5% of every dollar invested in equities.
This all seems to point to a big disparity between precious metal supply and demand in the medium term, while the gold price seems to have been holding well between $1700-$1800/oz during 2021. Overall, prospects for gold look bright, even bearing in mind competition from cryptos now being viewed by some as a store of value (though much younger, unstable and subject to regular government bashing).
Over to you now LEX. Let's hope the news and assays are as positive as the commodities environment.