Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
Correction - this company's year end is 25 January 2015 so I think the Annual Report can technically be issued as late as 22nd May (last working day before bank holiday weekend). The Annual Report is generally produced after the priliminary results have been announced though so we will probably hear before then. Volume appears to be higher today than the last few days.
Whilst this company has historically published results at the end of March, they do not have a great investor relations website and they do not have a financial calendar so there is no set date when the company have said that they will publish them. The listing rules give companies upto four months after the end of the relevant period to publish their annual report: DTR 4.1.3 An issuer must make public its annual financial report at the latest four months after the end of each financial year. So I believe that technically, ALY have until 30 April 2015 to issue them. Given that the results appear to be delayed (usually a pretty bad sign) its interesting to see the tick up today on no news so maybe something is occurring. I am a modest holder of shares in ALY having recently bought in at the recent 26-27p level on the basis of taking a 7% yield + hopefully some more growth.
Thanks for your posting the March presentation - I missed that. I like the "Commitment to Dividend" part - I believe that one of the reasons that this is not trading higher is uncertainty that the debt they have taken on (which seems manageable and not excessive) might lead to them cutting the dividend, considering the crazy trailing yield this is currently trading. I have recently bought HGM and intend to hold for the medium to long term for yield and growth.
That is true, though in order to be promoted to the FTSE 100, a company needs to knock off number 90. When I last calculated this it equated to EMG needing a share price of 275 or so.
Crude is down 2% to about $53 per barrel and yet we are up nearly 9% - anyone know the reason?
Just to clarify this post, this purchase was made May 2014 so is quite old news. However, I note he purchased the shares at 90p, above the current price. I've been looking for an entry into this share at below 85p and today it dipped below so I pick some up at about 84.5p inclusive of buying and selling commissions. If the final divi is maintained, this equates to a 10% - crazy.
I would broadly agree with your calculation on the basis of: - $175m re-purchase program, equates to about £117.18m - at a current share price of c195p that works out about 60million shares - this buyback program equates to about 6.6p per existing share Therefore the full year distribution to shareholders equates to an almost 6.6% yield at current prices (2.37p interim divi, 3.95p final divi and 6.6p buyback equivalent). One interesting point is that they have started the buyback before the ex-div date so they will also not have to pay the divi on all the shares they buy-back before 23rd April, which probably means that they won't actually pay out 100% of the management fee income.
This came up on my value radar recently as I noted a potential 13.5% divi yield and p/e, as far as I can tell of about 2. I have bought a small tranche of shares and intend to pound cost average over the coming months with a view to a fairly long term hold for divi + value growth. As far as I can see it, other than the obvious issue of where this company operates, the serviceability of the debt and the fact that the generous divi may be cut seem to be the only problems with this share, so I thought I'd do an analysis of the company's ability to service its debt and its divi at current levels: (1) as at 30 June 2014, the company had $304m debt, but net debt of $239m so there must have been $65m cash and gold on hand; (2) the margin appears to be good - RNS on 10 Dec '14 states TCC for the full year will be $650 / oz and the RNS on 27 Jan '15 states that the average gold price realised was $1,263 so a circa $615 gross margin on full year production of 259k oz. I can't see how this flows through to EBITDA in the half year results, but given that TCC and CAPEX will likely drop in H2 and the gold price and H1 production have gone up we should be looking at EBITDA for H2 of more than the $48.375m made in H1; (3) Assuming a conservative $100m full year EBITDA and given that maintaining the full year divi at 5p (so final divi of 2.5p) would cost the company about $25m, then divis are covered about 4 times and this leaves c$37.5m from H2 to reduce net debt; (4) The company's banking covenants require that net debt should not exceed 4 x EBITDA. The half year results show this ratio at 2.0 so comfortably within that range. I note that the half year results state that the debt is being paid monthly so the debt figure should have come down by full year stage; (5) Whilst most debt is repayable in 2016, it does say it is being paid of monthly. I note they also have a new un-drawn lending facility for $50m. I would have thought that given the head-room in the banking covenants and the security that a bank will have (gold forward sales) most lenders would be willing to extend these facilities?; To be honest, I am struggling to see a downside here - are there, for example any mines coming to end of life? - further heavy capex required to sustain existing mines or bring new one's onstream? or might the rouble devaluation to create non-cash impairments? (but this would also help and be offset by lower TCC presumably?). The market cap is currently c$200m and if the company makes EBITDA of c$100m this year and pays a 5p divi, that is a 13.5% yield and p/e of 2. If this share traded at a p/e of 10 and divi yield of 3.5% (conservative multiples for gold miners) the share price would be about 150p - 4 x the current level. I am not seeking to ramp here but what is wrong with this company for it to be trading as such low multiples - this is a genuine question and I would love someone to challenge what I admit is a fairly bullish picture.
I believe this is a sell. The RNS states Norges are now below 3% - as I understand it, this is the lowest notification threshold so we will not get told via RNS if they continue to sell.out completely.
Agreed. I had a quick look this morning and was surprised to see ac1% drop on these results then just checked again now and down a further 10%. Could this be: 1. Russian macro economic factors; 2. Has the above caused a move in the GEL against the £?; 3. Schroders selling down their stake further, perhaps due to the above? If the latter, it may be worth waiting to see if there is further selling pressure on the downside before topping up further? I think if i'd kept an eye on the price today i'd have been very tempted with a cheeky top up. Good luck all.
We are quite a bit away from getting back in the FTSE 100 I believe. In order to get into the 100 on a re-shuffle, I understand that you need to knock off number 90 in the FTSE 100. This is currently around the £4.6bn market cap level and we'd need to see an SP of 275p. I'm not saying this is unrealistic in the long run and I have a lot of faith in this company. I do own shares in EMG.
This came up on my value radar recently as I noted a potential 13.5% divi yield and p/e, as far as I can tell of about 2. I have bought a small tranche of shares and intend to pound cost average over the coming months with a view to a fairly long term hold for divi + value growth. As far as I can see it, other than the obvious issue of where this company operates, the serviceability of the debt and the fact that the generous divi may be cut seem to be the only problems with this share, so I thought I'd do an analysis of the company's ability to service its debt and its divi at current levels: (1) as at 30 June 2014, the company had $304m debt, but net debt of $239m so there must have been $65m cash and gold on hand; (2) the margin appears to be good - RNS on 10 Dec '14 states TCC for the full year will be $650 / oz and the RNS on 27 Jan '15 states that the average gold price realised was $1,263 so a circa $615 gross margin on full year production of 259k oz. I can't see how this flows through to EBITDA in the half year results, but given that TCC and CAPEX will likely drop in H2 and the gold price and H1 production have gone up we should be looking at EBITDA for H2 of more than the $48.375m made in H1; (3) Assuming a conservative $100m full year EBITDA and given that maintaining the full year divi at 5p (so final divi of 2.5p) would cost the company about $25m, then divis are covered about 4 times and this leaves c$37.5m from H2 to reduce net debt; (4) The company's banking covenants require that net debt should not exceed 4 x EBITDA. The half year results show this ratio at 2.0 so comfortably within that range. I note that the half year results state that the debt is being paid monthly so the debt figure should have come down by full year stage; (5) Whilst most debt is repayable in 2016, it does say it is being paid of monthly. I note they also have a new un-drawn lending facility for $50m. I would have thought that given the head-room in the banking covenants and the security that a bank will have (gold forward sales) most lenders would be willing to extend these facilities?; To be honest, I am struggling to see a downside here - are there, for example any mines coming to end of life? - further heavy capex required to sustain existing mines or bring new one's onstream? or might the rouble devaluation to create non-cash impairments? (but this would also help and be offset by lower TCC presumably?). The market cap is currently c$200m and if the company makes EBITDA of c$100m this year and pays a 5p divi, that is a 13.5% yield and p/e of 2. If this share traded at a p/e of 10 and divi yield of 3.5% (conservative multiples for gold miners) the share price would be about 150p - 4 x the current level. I am not seeking to ramp here but what is wrong with this company for it to be trading as such low multiples - this is a genuine question and I would love someone to challenge what I admit is a fairly bullish picture of t
What happened at about 1000 GMT today to give the share price a 6% boost - it was trading at about 400 earlier in the day - now at about 420?
Well spotted and thanks for the info on this. I understand that the inverse h&s predicts quite a specific target price (something to do with the collar IIRC) - are you able to provide any insight on what this technical indicator suggests? I'm more of a fundamentals and a contrarian value based investor but i find the technical side fascinating. I have recently started building a position in this share and in PLUS on the basis of the yield, p/e, low net debt and given the recent volatility in the markets must be good for both of these. TLPR seemed too good to resist at 250 and PLUS at 550 when i started to buy both.
Indianna - the part of my post about barclays wasn't particularly in response to anyone else's post - I was making a separate observation about the barclays rights issue.
Whilst this came as a shock to me and the way it was communicated wasn't great, i have a couple of observations: 1. I'm not really sure this can logically be called 'looking after m8's', given that the price fixed by the book build is now more than the current price. The II's who bought shares in the placement are currently nursing a loss. 2. If we compare this to the capital raise carried out by barc recently by rights issue, we are a lot better off. The ri price in the case of barc was 185 when the prevailing shareprice at the time i think was high 200s/ low 300s. Contrast that with bnc and these shares were only issued at a 10% discount to the price before the announcement + i imagine that the book build was a lot cheaper to conduct than a rights issue (though i don't purport to have any knowledge of such things). I accept it wasn't the best trading day that i've had, but it could have been a lot worse and it sounds like this was the right thing to do for the long term. As always, happy to hear other views and be corrected.
ARMANI - with respect I just wanted to clarify a couple of points in your two posts. 1. In your first post headed "Santander" you indicated / asked whether the new dividend would be 3 x 0.05 euro cash payments. As I understand it the new divi structure will be 3x 0.05 euro cash and then a 0.05 euro scrip divi such that the full year divi will be 0.2 euro. This is a third of what it was before, but will no option to take the cash elements as scrip, most holders will also get hit with Spanish withholding tax so we'll get a bit less. I understand the plan is to move to a progressive divi policy paying out 30-40% of earnings in cash. 2. In your second post headed "BNC", with respect I think that saying that a reduction in divi will increase EPS is a bit misleading, as it sounds as though divis are paid out before EPS is calculated. Earnings per share are calculated before the divi is declared and the divi is paid out of earnings. It is certainly true that "retained" profits will increase, since the new policy anticipates only 30-40% of earnings being distributed, whereas the previous regime was paying more than 100% of earnings out as divi (albeit by scrip). I suspect what you meant though is because the divi won't be paid scrip anymore, the future EPS will not be continually diluted by the issue of significant numbers of new shares every quarter. I do agree with the sentiments in relation to P/E however and arguably a P/E of 10 is rather conservative for a well capitalised bank the size of bnc with very little exposure to all the problems associated with the likes of barclays, rbs, lloyds, et al. As always, I'm happy to be corrected. In summary I think bnc is probably a decent long term investment at this price. I think the difficulty short term will be that the traditional investor base for bnc has been the income investor due to the yield and this is now more of a value / growth story. I expect there will be quite a lot of short term selling by traditional income investors which I expect will hurt the SP. This may take until April to play out when the last of the "old style" divi s are paid out. It may then take a while for the value / growth investors to see the potential. To be honest, I do try to pick stocks with at least 5% divi so I think that I will be selling this in the medium term but I'm not sure this is the right time to sell out so will hold for the time being, possibly add a little at these prices. Obviously, this is just my view and not guidance upon which people should rely.
Blackpuss - I believe that I may have mis-led you with my last post. The "information on capital increase" RNS seems to indicate the old divi will apply to both the Feb divi and the April divi - see the footnote 1 on the first page: "Banco Santander maintains its previously stated intention that the shareholders remuneration corresponding to the 2014 results be supplemented with the application of the “Santander Dividendo Elección” program (scrip dividend scheme) on January/February and April/May 2015, in each case, for an approximate amount of fifteen euro cents per share"
I am a modest holder of these shares. Initially the "suspension" followed by "capital raise and dividend cut" RNSs came as something of a shock, I think this might well be received well by the market, but would appreciate any opinion. Bad Points 1. There was no warning for this and its being dealt with by an overnight book build so a very short term placing, which I am assuming will be below current levels. 2. Divi cut I think is more than most analyst and investors (including me) were expecting. 3. If 3 out of the 4 divis are cash this means I and other GB shareholders will get hit with Spanish withholding tax, further reducing divi. 4. This may cause short term selling pressure of those previously holding these for the yield. 5. Personally, I think these announcements have been handled quite badly and not communicated very well - I don't know if it has been lost in translation but the RNSs were not particularly explained well no reason was given for the capital raising. Good Points 1. This appears to address the concerns of "investors" and analysts and these types of drastic action to address known issues are often well received by the market - e.g. TSCO announcement today. 2. The capital raise is a maximum of 9.9% of the existing capital. Given that the bank has been effectively issuing about 10% more shares each year since 2007 as part of its scrip dividend policy, we have all got used to this level of dilution so this may lessen the shock value of this announcement. 3. The divi is now actually covered by earnings and appears to be more sustainable, but the yield is still in line with others in the sector, e.g. barc. 4. Realistically, we were all expecting a divi cut here. BLACKPUSS - on a side note, I believe from reading the RNS that the divi in February will be the same as before, i.e. scrip at 0.15 euro and this new divi policy will apply from the 2015 accounting year onwards. I'll be interested to see how successful the book build will be and what price they get for them and then further what price we will open at following the announcement of the result. I'd be interested to hear any comments.
Thank you for that Franco23 - weird with the link issue but as the other contributor said it is in your history. That page is really helpful thanks