Member Info for Corryvreckan1

Re-dom confirmed that it could complete in Q4 "Assuming all necessary approvals are obtained" as per the document link I posted in the OP here on Saturday.

The E-Lizzy could be Q3 - "commissioning and ramp-up is expected to continue throughout Q2 2024."

I think it is all about the copper price and the wider macro in the near term.

None of the IIs or big market players would have been expecting the 250 to happen this quarter anyway, and they are the ones controlling the SP movements on a share like this, so I don’t think it was supporting the recent rise and therefore don’t expect a fall as a result.

Chart technicals suggest a poss breakout on Friday so may not get your re-trace. Will likely depend on market/copper price overall on Monday if that is to be a sustained breakout, then see what Q1 on Tuesday brings. Is it Christmas this week ;o)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/videos/c3ggn1z6w2eo

Also on the website a document with details on the Re-dom process (Cross-Border Conversion) following the change to Cypriot law in March. If you want to skip all the legal jargon then page 19 has the tentative timetable suggesting completion around Oct/Nov.

https://atalayamining.com/investors/other-documents/

AGM will be on 27 June so expect resolutions on this to be presented there.

That means FTSE250 would not now be likely until the December review.

That Cemfree buy makes a lot of sense. It's already part of their Greenbloc product so they have ensured continuity of supply by now owning the IP for it, and the cost they would previously have had for sourcing the product is also now inhouse and an offset against whatever they paid to buy the company. Plus it stops any competitors gaining any advantage and/or price hikes if they had bought it instead. Win/win :)

The previous link was the EU report only, this one for the UK:

https://www.pmi.spglobal.com/Public/Home/PressRelease/1d5b06d5c76c47238c8171cb23b9ad73

Agreed, that purchase would be easily covered from existing resources.

I think the poor EU Construction PMI report on 7 May last week may have been the catalyst here. The SP started falling from the same day. The UK PMI the same day was a lot better though, and obviously the new lime businesses extend the company beyond construction, but overall the market sentiment would respond to the PMI.

Link to the report here - this will automatically download/open a pdf from S&P Global on your device:

https://www.pmi.spglobal.com/Public/Home/PressRelease/bbc758cdaa0a4ec3874fe05ead1247d3

Tyke - you asked about voting %. Yes, it is a simple majority 50.01% or above to be re-elected. Note that is the % of the votes actually cast for that resolution, not a % of the total voting shares in issue, many of which won't be voting at all.

For the special resolutions (5 - share buy-back and 6 - allotting new shares) it's a 75% threshold to cross for approval.

If TB is not re-elected then I'm not completely sure on what steps happens next and I don't know what Jersey laws may also apply here to the make up of the Board. I don't like guessing on these things so will leave that for anyone else knowledgeable.

Broad sector read across from Easyjet results today

Steve, I appreciate your caution and yes I did suddenly appear after lurking for a long time so understandable. My grasp of the situation came from measured research of available material and I’m just a PI with absolutely no affinity to the company. Hopefully you can see from my posts that I share the grievances expressed on here around poor communication/admin and also on broker failings (a long term windmill I have often been tilting at).

I have just read over my earlier posts and can see how it may have looked like I was trying to sway opinion on the AGM – absolutely not my intention and I was just trying to be balanced and informative for posters who were perhaps uncertain about some of the terminology and processes. I fully endorse sending whatever messages necessary to company directors when they come up short - another windmill on another hill :(

Steve, in reply to your post at 11:55am today (apologies for the length, make a brew first):

On the brokers not knowing/checking what is going on or what is up to date – surprisingly common. Retail brokers are often high volume/low margin businesses and simply don’t invest enough in their platforms to keep on top of all of this. I have sometimes found them giving out completely false and potentially damaging information because they haven’t understood communication from a company.

I mentioned before that they may have hurriedly put together the current voting option and maybe didn’t check the detail first. The flying brands website may be a historic link on their company resource page which wasn’t updated after Oct 2018 when the name was changed * – whoever prepared the voting page wouldn’t know that, but maybe still should have checked it given the name is very different. It may even have been a field that was automatically populated from their database when they created the voting form and so wasn’t spotted at all. On ii, it doesn’t even show the web address in the link, it just shows an internal ii address but then automatically opens a new window with that dodgy flying brands page without warning!

As for me – I have a background in corporate finance management and financial services which gives me a good starting point, although not recently. I’m fairly well versed in company and stock exchange regulations from that, and in market dynamics through frequent research, and these things apply to every company hence me knowing about the AGM resolutions and procedures, which are all fairly standard here (other than the lack of RNS!).

I learned a lot from reading these boards over the years so happy to contribute back where I can hopefully add value, and help answer questions I likely asked myself at some point. This has been on my watch list for ages and I often check posts on here so had a broad idea of everything going on. Hoping my posts are balanced and well received but obviously happy to be challenged if anyone disagrees or needs to correct my (lengthy) musings, we all learn from the discussions that way.

Best wishes

Corry

* I have just had a scan through the RNS history on here and I can’t see anywhere that the company notified the market of the change of website address, so brokers may never have known to change it. Previous RNS often just referred to “the Company’s Corporate website” without stating what that was, until maybe around April 2023 when the new site address started appearing on them.

For clarity I mean the links on broker websites and any reference to flying brands. The IQAI link I provided earlier is legit and is also on previous corporate RNS that they have issued.

Warning - if anyone is seeing the same website links that Steve and I mention do not click on them. It looks like ownership of the old domain name has been dropped and since been picked up by someone else and rehashed for their own unknown and possible nefarious purposes. This happens a lot with old domain names across the entire internet so always best to check through your browser if unsure.

Steve - I'll come back with a reply to your post later, just wanted to get that warning out for now.

Steve124 - the dodgy links in the voting section on HL are a mistake by HL, not IQAI. interactive investor have done the same. The brokers haven't updated their own records after the name change from flying brands and subsequent actions. I suspect the brokers have also been caught out by the lack of RNS to notify the AGM so have now rushed out the voting option to meet their customers demands/enquiries about it, without checking the details first, because the deadline is coming up soon.

The link they should be providing is https://www.iqai.ltd/

Scroll down to the bottom of that page (or click on publications in the top right corner) and you will see the correct links for the AGM Notice, the proxy form (which you don't need if you are voting online) and the 2023 Annual Report (which is to be voted on under Resolution 1).

Perhaps you could notify HL of the error and give them the correct link so they can update, Tyke maybe do the same? I'm going to do the same for ii. Trek, if you have time maybe kick ii as well - the more shareholders that complain to their brokers the better service they will give.

If anyone with other brokers hasn't had any communication or voting options at all then it's maybe because of the lack of RNS to prompt them. If all they have is a letter or email from the Share Registrar then that could be gathering dust in an inbox and then conveniently forgotten about after the event. You could also give them a prod and send them the link above to see if they respond to help you.

Steve124 - sorry to intrude as I see your question was to Tyke, but just to help put your mind at rest on a couple of things:

The wording about setting their own salaries I can't see in the notice so wonder if it's the bit in resolution 4 that concerns you - "to authorise the directors to fix their remuneration" - that relates only to the remuneration of the Auditors and is a standard wording in most company AGM notices.

The 105% limit for share buybacks is fairly common as well. It means they won't be buying back shares at too high a price as they are limited to 5% above recent average mid price for any purchase instruction. That could be seen as a good thing as it stops them buying unnecessarily high during periods of high volatility and also deters anyone from trying to pump the share price purely in the hope that the company will automatically buy their shares at an inflated price. It is shareholder's funds they would use to buyback shares so you would want them to do so responsibly and this point maybe helps that.

Not trying to influence your voting decision in any way, just trying to explain how these two points are normal AGM resolutions for many companies and are not designed with anything ulterior in mind. They were voted on and passed at last year's AGM as well.

That's in Resolution 5 which is to allow the company to buy it's own shares in the market, i.e. a share buyback.

It's a fairly standard resolution in many main market companies and just copied over each year, amending the max number of shares as appropriate. Doesn't mean it will happen, just gives the company the authority to do it if they wish and it's more efficient to include it in the AGM each year to save calling a separate EGM and therefore delaying the process.

Just realised the date has not been posted here yet - 29th May, for those who don't like/cba clicking on links.

As Trek notes below, brokers that do offer on-line voting will normally have their own deadline up to a week in advance so that they can collate all the votes and submit in time.

They don’t necessarily have to RNS it, publication on the company website is okay as long as they also post out hard copy notice to members that it is on the website, per the Companies Act sections 307-309:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/part/13/chapter/3/crossheading/notice-of-meetings/enacted?view=plain

If you bought your shares via a retail broker that holds them in a nominee account in their name then it’s up to the broker to decide if they will notify you of the details and/or give you an on-line voting option – many don’t offer that as part of their standard service or it can be variable and inconsistent as to when they do notify you.

But very odd to not RNS it this time given that they always have in the past. Perhaps to cut down costs? Except…

They could have mentioned it in the annual report which was issued the same day, 29th April. The financial report version of that was issued in an RNS that day but didn’t mention ‘AGM’ anywhere; the full Annual Report published on their website, which was mentioned at the very top of the RNS, just stated “…the AGM, to be held in May/June 2024…” despite separately publishing the actual date the same day. All seems like a bit of poor admin/oversight?

Note that some of the links on the company website don’t work directly as they add an extra ‘iq-ai-ltd/’ erroneous part to the link so you get a 404 page not found error. If this happens then just edit the link in your browser bar so that the first part looks similar to the link posted by Shrek1st below. The notices will then download/open as a pdf.

We apologise for the delay at the last station which was caused by a technical fault with the market signalling. This has now been corrected by applying a couple of belated but half-decent broker ratings. We are now underway again and trust that you will enjoy the rest of your journey.

Your dates are completely wrong, you need to use this year's schedule with the actual dates. Tracker funds will buy when their own internal procedures require them to, it doesn't have to be straight away and the earlier 'indicative' date is not a signal to buy, it's just a head's up on what may happen the following month. The only dates that are relevant are the confirmation date as changes can happen between the two, and the later rebalancing effective date.

ATYM also need to complete Re-dom to Spain before they can be included in the indices and that does not yet look like happening in time.

Market contagion, everyone got hit when the bots warmed up. Expect it will settle down soon enough.