We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Suggest you re-read the Chairman's Statement from the AGM in June last year:
"The US$953m NPV of the Project equates to 44p/share, or approximately ten times our current share price. Our Project has been significantly derisked by the favourable DIA decision and other lithium stocks which have also completed a Scoping Study on their respective projects trade on an average multiple to their net asset value of around 0.3x. Savannah currently trades at just 0.1x, so we will be marketing extensively over the coming months to highlight this investment opportunity to market participants. Furthermore, as we move through later milestones, such as the DFS, we expect a re-rating in our multiple to the 'post DFS' peer group, currently trading on an average of 0.5x, and the lithium producers average of 0.8x net asset value."
So we SHOULD already be at 3x current price, moving to 5x post DFS.
Big fish businessman and investor in Portugal must have his ear to the ground and be confident this is a good investment.
Is there any way we can ask the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Central Investigation and Criminal Action Department to come here and investigate our government ministers over the PPE contracts, as our own police don't seem to be interested :-)
Interesting article in this week’s Economist on Superbatteries (solid-state Li-ion). Some choice quotes:
“…carmakers have been looking to replace traditional Li-ion batteries…with more advanced “solid state” versions.”
“… the first solid state Li-ion batteries due to go into production within the next few years.”
“Toyota…recently announced …a technological breakthrough…with plans to start manufacturing a solid state battery as early as 2027”.
“Japanese carmakers have made great advances in working out how to manufacture solid-state Li-ion batteries at scale.
“Solid state batteries will significantly consume more lithium”.
“Batteries containing higher-capacity cathodes and anodes will need 40-100% more lithium”.
“…companies need to secure their supply lines.. That will be difficult because...new mines…can take a decade or more before they reach full production.”
“One way or another…solid-state Li-ion batteries are coming down the road.”
Sounds to me like SAV’s timing is perfect!
Wondering about offtake agreements...
I guess we're not really ready to do deals yet, and probably wouldn't be wise as prices are still rising.
But there's going to be a shortage of product in the next few years, and buyers are going to be clamouring for product. So why not take a cash payment just to buy a seat at the table? Guarantee supply of up to X tons, but price to be fixed later?
Toyota working on a new generation of solid state batteries:
https://www.ft.com/content/87cb8e92-8e82-4755-8fc3-2943f8f63e1d
Import point: "They replace a liquid electrolyte with a solid one and use lithium metal at the anode instead of graphite". Means more requirement for lithium!!
In line with the Chairman's stated aim to increase market awareness of us, perhaps a change of name would help? "Savannah" conjures up visions of Africa, with all its attendant problems. Perhaps something closer to home (and more relevant) would help to focus attention on what we're doing. "Euro Lithium" is taken but I'm sure that clever marketing people could come up with something equally direct and meaningful.
FinnCap current price target (Sept 21) 9p.
SR123: "As expected, started to rise and getting harder to buy :)"
chrissev1: "Just bought 8 million this morning. Not sure if brave or stupid."
You guys need to do a better job of coordinating your ramping. Chrissev1, you just tossed out £100k on a punt. ha ha ha.
"Oil is not dead because of Biden"
Famous quote from Saudi oil minister some years ago:
"The Stone Age did not come to an end for a lack of stones". Meaning when better alternatives are developed, things move on. So it will happen with fossil fuels. Not to worry for us now, oil will be needed for many more years yet to come.
Paris to dodge the shareholders while keeping travel costs for co. Officers down. No other reason to come to Europe then not have it in UK.
News item is dated january 2013!!!!
I'll repeat my fag packet calculation from a few weeks ago (which seems to have disappeared).
We have 520m tonnes of coal in the ground. If valued at $1/tonne "in the ground", that's $520m, or around £400m. Spread over 98m shares, that's £4.08 per share.
Now there will be arguments up and down. The Chinese will be saying "well you can't sell it to anyone else, so we'll give you £1 a share". Tang will be saying "well you can't get the coal you need anywhere else, so you can have it for £5/share". I reckon they will settle for a value based on an industry-standard valuation of coal in the ground, adjusted for capital requirements and ease of mining.
Regarding timing, the Chinese won't make an offer until they are sure of getting government approval for the whole project (or at least until they know "the fix is in"). If the latter, they may make a low-ball offer on the basis of "take this now, or take your chances of not getting final approval".
Interesting times, but I'm still convinced Tang is aiming to sell outright - for the right price - and won't want a long-term partnership agreement.
Ah yes, thanks! Easy to forget sometimes that GCM is a UK company.
Probably something I’ve missed, but why would they want/need to stay below 30%?
I reiterate my point from a few days ago. I think the end result will be a 100% buyout og GCM by the Chinese. Why?
Because (1) we’re a tiny company that knows absolutely NOTHING about power engineering or building and running power stations. We have nothing to contribute to a JV - except our coal. The cost to the Chinese of buying us out would be a relatively small part of their overall costs for the full project. (2) if we DID take part in a JV we would be a (very) junior partner. I don’t see Tang being happy getting trampled underfoot by the Chinese, AND as a JV partner we would have to wait 5-10 years to complete the projest before we see returns. A lot could happen in that time, so much better to take the bird in hand now.
I’m convinced a BO is what will happen, the only question is the price, which is an interesting conundrum. In most negotiations there are usually several possible buyers and sellers, here there’s really only one of each. The Chinese can’t easily get the coal from elsewhere, and we don’t have any other obvious customers.
All IMO, from no particular fount of knowledge.
I’m sure it’s just the Chinese playing hardball, and Tang pushing back. Remember, the Chinese idea of JV or any form of cooperation is that both sides work together in harmony and friendship for the benefit of the Chinese side.
GP, I'm no expert but I think £10 per share is way over the top.
Don't forget the coal is STILL IN THE GROUND, not mined, washed and in rail cars waiting to go.
Coal in the ground is worth what, $1/tonne?
We have 572m tonnes, so $572m worth. With 98m shares, that's $5.84 or £4.50 per share., And I think that's probably optimistic.
Interested to hear what others think.
Like many here, I've been in and out of this share several times over the past 5 years or so, always viewing it as a binary gamble - multi multibag or bust.
Here's a few of topics I haven't seen mentioned on this BB before.
First, Bangladesh ranks 143/180 on the world corruption index, which means that nothing official gets done without brown envelopes changing hands. As a UK-quoted company, GCM is legally prohibited from doing this, and the directors risk massive penalties if they do. Not so the Chinese. You can bet your life that they know exactly where the brown envelopes need to go, and how much to put in them, and will have no compunction in getting this done. This is one of the things, IMO, that will finally get this project moving.
Second, I see talk of GCM becoming a "power company" - but how long does it take to build a huge power station from scratch, in a country like Bangladesh? 10 years? 20? GCM will not be a "power company", and will not see revenues from all that coal, until those power stations are built. The only way revenues will come sooner is if GCM are allowed to mine the coal and sell it elsewhere (within BD or export) while the power stations are being built.
Finally, given the length of time it will take to build the power stations, I don't see PowerChina wanting to take the risk of what might happen to GCM or the price of coal in the meantime.I think they will want to ensure their supply, and the cleanest way to do that is to buyout GCM. (Yes, I know Tang has said he wants to mine, but I think that's just a negotiating position, unless of course he sees opportunities, and will have permission, to sell the coal elsewhere as I said above).
All IMO, from no particular background of expertise, except that I know the Chinese.
Strongman - thank you. Much appreciated.