Member Info for chrismar

I feel like i'm missing something here. Shouldn't the market cap, in theory, value the company at value of investments + perceived growth potential?

De Giro seem to be a victim of their own success at the moment. They are only answering email queries within four working days, refusing to set up new companies on their platform (just a standard AIM company) and now this.

Trading companies with low fees have become very popular during the pandemic to the point where some aren't taking on any more new customers, suggesting they are under-staffed at best, or over-leveraged at worst.

Anyway, I'll hopefully be selling some on Thursday afternoon, hoping that FOMO has kicked in, so hoping for recent new highs before the weekend. I'll also be keeping the majority of my holding with news due next week.

From the RNS
"These (figures) are preliminary and unaudited figures and do not include a small number of royalty payments which will be included in the final audited figures."

This indicates that income is currently understated because they have not estimated the amount of royalties that they're receiving.

Now that they are generating income, they really need a finance person who knows accounting regulations and how to record in which period sales are allocated to, accrued income and estimate royalty income if an exact figure is not available. Accounting for everything on a cash basis is no longer an option and SOH needs to be aware of that.

There still seems hope for the future, but my patience is beginning to wear thin, especially if they can't get relatively simple financial info correct when releasing updates.

Nano the crypto currency is under 6% up, so while a good theory, I can't see it as being correct this time.

Nice 5 minute mention on the podcast today from about an hour in. I like how John Meyer clarified that in this case, the word "exceptional" in the RNS actually meant exceptional.

NelsonTheDog highlighted these reasons for a higher PE earlier in the week, which put it better than i could:-
- growth - we are adding organic growth at well above industry norm;
- ESG - we are more appealing to ethical funds
- Speed of project turnaround for organic growth - we can announce deal and have revenues in under a year - a typical miner takes 3-6 years for the same
- Quality of management - i would rather Leon in charge than many others - commands a premium

Growth companies demand a higher PE (see history of IT companies) than the average company making profits year on year. Hence my reasoning for suggesting a forward PE of 20-25 would be reasonable.

The nearest sector to us is mining, although our cost base is lower than most. Simply Wall Street suggest the industry average for LSE mining stocks is 14.9. Picking a few miners random, profit making miners PE from this site (unsure on their timing or accuracy):-

BHP = 16.94
RIO = 16.05
SLP = 9.26
AAL = 12.58
FRES = 51.93
HOCH = 46.54
POG = 42.04
JLP = 14.04
CEY = 21.23

Median = 16.94
Mean = 25.62

Conclusion: Our forward PE of under 5 looks low compared to other miners.

While 60p does seem a long way from where we are now, a forward PE of 15 feels low to me. With 15 being industry average I would tentatively suggest a PE of 20-25 for such a high growth company as well as other reasons outlined by another poster the other day.

I agree, very positive about the future. They both seemed keen to state that becoming a mid-cap mining company is very much the goal. What size would a mid-cap be? £1bn+ market cap?

I'm no expert but I thought a 5% dilution from new shares issued.

PE of 15 does look to be the sector average, although with JLP being a growing company, it may warrant a higher PE.

Thanks Busby and Shorn. My countdown clock says 3 days! Maybe thy saw my post and changed it. I'll sign up again. Bring on Monday.

My mate just signed up and got an email saying it is on Monday as per the RNS! I'm very confused now. Has anyone else signed up?

Just signed up for the webcast. It is on Tuesday, not Monday.

The RNS seems like good news to me. that's four or five institutional investors getting involved in the last two months or so now. I think that is the story that shareholders should be looking at.

Leon mentions a break in December. Does this indicate that these figures are for 24 working weeks, so to expect 8% better for January - June as that should be for 26 working weeks.

That along with commodity price rises and further increases in production, of course.

I'm thinking we could be seeing a rise in earnings of circa 50% in the second half of the financial year compared to the first, which would make this share look even more undervalued.

Started with 5% in HZM. It is now up to 24%.
JLP and VLX both 15% at the moment and everything else under 10%.

Never had this much (amount) in a stock before. Is there a trick to getting out of a multi-bagger efficiently (not that I want to any time soon)?

The slides on the latest Burford Capital (BUR) presentation give a guide into some of the stats in litigation funding cases.

They lose 10% of their cases, win 30% in court and 60% get settled before they get to court.

The ones that won after going to court got paid out significantly more than those that got settled, although appear to have a 25% chance of losing given the stat above.

From taking a case on, it took an average of 1.8 years to get a judgement, and 2.3 years to receive payment from whom a judgement has been entered against.

Correction - 96p would be £2bn.

Not for sale, but if somebody did come in with a bid for billions of dollars it is because of how they are running the company at present.

So does that mean he'd consider offers of $2bn+? That's around 96p.

BUR are listing in America next month so keep an eye on that one, while this is suspended, to see the effect on share price.

I wonder if he's still mates with Sean Parker. First President of Facebook, founder of the original Napster and board member of Spotify. IT would be interesting if he got back involved in this.